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 | 8 | — |
| Target share | 6.8% | — |
| Catch rate | 62.5% | — |
| Success rate per target | 62.5% | — |
| Yards per target | 7.5 | — |
| Explosive catches | 12.5% | — |
| Deep-target rate | 25.0% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 1 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 1 | — |
Charting
Where Ludwig's plays went: throw and catch spots, air yards and yards after the catch, read from the play-by-play
Where he's targeted8 targets charted
Game Log
Matt Ludwig'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 |  Abilene Christian | W 33–10 | — | · | · | · | · | · |
| 2 | @ Oregon State | W 35–24 | 7.5 | 3 | 30 | 10.0 | 1 | 15 |
| 3 |  Houston | W 28–26 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 4 |  Sam Houston | W 49–14 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 5 | @ Colorado | W 29–7 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 7 |  Arizona State | W 53–25 | 6.1 | 1 | 24 | 24.0 | 0 | 24 |
| 8 | @ Cincinnati | L 24–37 | 4.3 | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 0 | 6 |
| 9 |  Arizona | W 34–26 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 2026 · 4 games | 6.0 | 5 | 60 | 12.0 | 1 | 24 | ||
2026 Season Stats
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 5 | 1122nd / 2089 |
| Yards | 60 | 1059th / 2074 |
| Yards / catch | 12 | — |
| Touchdowns | 1 | 412th / 914 |
| Long | 24 | — |
| Kick returns | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Returns | 1 | — |
| Yards | 8 | — |
| Average | 8 | — |
| Touchdowns | 0 | — |
| Long | 8 | — |
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 | Special teams | Snap share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 · Abilene Christian | — | 73 | · | · | 1 | — |
| Wk 2 · Oregon State | ✓ TE | 74 | ~58 (49–70) | 4 | · | 78% |
| Wk 4 · Sam Houston | — | 65 | ~30 (14–43) | 2 | · | 46% |
| Wk 7 · Arizona State | — | 64 | ~22 (10–31) | 1 | · | 34% |
| Wk 8 · Cincinnati | — | 76 | ~21 (10–30) | 1 | · | 28% |
| Season | 1 GS | 547 | 131 (90–176) | 8 | 1 | 24% |
Position Room
5 TEs on the Texas Tech roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Terrance Carter Jr. | TE | SR | 20 | 193 | 2 | 17% | +0.28 |
| 85 | Jett Carpenter | TE | SR | 7 | 83 | 0 | 5% | +0.68 |
| 5 | Matt Ludwig | TE | FR | 5 | 60 | 1 | 6% | +0.36 |
| 83 | Jack Esparza | TE | SR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 89 | Jason Llewellyn | TE | SR | — | — | — | — | — |
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. Texas Tech depth chart →