Efficiency & Role
EPA = expected points added per play. Compared with every FBS WR/TE who qualifies
Advanced
Computed from every play, garbage time excluded. FBS rank among players with enough volume
| Receiving | Value | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Targets | 30 | — |
| Target share | 17.2% | 236th / 534 |
| Catch rate | 76.7% | 70th / 534 |
| Success rate per target | 56.7% | 114th / 534 |
| Yards per target | 9.3 | 159th / 534 |
| Explosive catches | 6.7% | 412th / 534 |
| Deep-target rate | 0.0% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 5 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 6 | — |
Charting
Where Bowman's plays went: throw and catch spots, air yards and yards after the catch, read from the play-by-play
Where he's targeted31 targets charted
Game Log
Mark Bowman's box score, game by game, from ESPN, with a 0–10 game score for each (hover it for how it works). Click a result for the full game
| Receiving | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk | Opponent | Result | Game score | Rec | Yds | Y/R | TD | Long |
| 1 |  San José State | W 42–26 | 5.8 | 3 | 15 | 5.0 | 0 | 8 |
| 1 |  Fresno State | W 39–0 | 6.6 | 3 | 30 | 10.0 | 0 | 15 |
| 2 |  Louisiana | W 49–30 | 9.6 | 6 | 83 | 13.8 | 2 | 35 |
| 3 | @ Rutgers | W 42–35 | 6.7 | 3 | 32 | 10.7 | 0 | 17 |
| 4 |  Oregon | L 27–41 | 7.5 | 6 | 44 | 7.3 | 0 | 16 |
| 5 |  Washington | W 25–21 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 6 | @ Penn State | W 31–23 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 8 | @ Wisconsin | L 7–24 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 9 |  Ohio State | W 30–18 | 8.4 | 3 | 79 | 26.3 | 0 | 70 |
| 2026 · 6 games | 7.4 | 24 | 283 | 11.8 | 2 | 70 | ||
2026 Season Stats
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 24 | 229th / 2089 |
| Yards | 283 | 278th / 2074 |
| Yards / catch | 11.8 | 268th / 460 |
| Touchdowns | 2 | 223rd / 914 |
| Long | 70 | — |
Snaps by Game
Estimated snaps from a model trained on real NFL snap counts. Ranges in brackets are where the real number lands 80% of the time: wide for a single game, tighter over the season. How it works
| Game | Start | Team plays | Est. snaps | Plays involved | Snap share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 · San José State | ✓ TE | 76 | ~41 (35–50) | 3 | 54% |
| Wk 1 · Fresno State | ✓ TE | 68 | ~34 (16–49) | 3 | 50% |
| Wk 2 · Louisiana | ✓ TE | 72 | ~49 (42–59) | 6 | 68% |
| Wk 3 · Rutgers | — | 63 | ~51 (43–62) | 6 | 81% |
| Wk 4 · Oregon | ✓ TE | 75 | ~63 (53–75) | 10 | 84% |
| Wk 9 · Ohio State | ✓ TE | 50 | ~29 (13–41) | 3 | 58% |
| Season | 5 GS | 611 | 267 (228–319) | 31 | 44% |
Position Room
9 TEs on the USC roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | Mark Bowman | TE | FR | 24 | 283 | 2 | 16% | +0.60 |
| Carson Tabaracci | TE | 9 | 73 | 0 | 5% | +0.01 | ||
| Taniela Tupou | TE | 8 | 71 | 1 | 8% | +0.55 | ||
| 84 | Tucker Ashcraft | TE | JR | 4 | 36 | 0 | 4% | +0.77 |
| 23 | Walter Matthews | TE | SO | 1 | 12 | 0 | 3% | +0.45 |
| 38 | Patrick O'Brien | TE | SO | — | — | — | — | — |
| 44 | Manoah Leiato | TE | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 83 | Fisher Melton | TE | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 87 | Josiah Jefferson | TE | JR | — | — | — | — | — |
Stats, EPA and usage come from CollegeFootballData.com and refresh daily. FBS ranks only count players with enough volume for the stat to mean something. Qualifying for EPA takes 4+ plays per team game. USC depth chart →