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 | 5 | — |
| Target share | 5.6% | — |
| Catch rate | 60.0% | — |
| Success rate per target | 20.0% | — |
| Yards per target | 3.6 | — |
| Explosive catches | 0.0% | — |
| Deep-target rate | 20.0% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 1 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 1 | — |
Charting
Where Koontz's plays went: throw and catch spots, air yards and yards after the catch, read from the play-by-play
Where he's targeted7 targets charted
Game Log
Kyle Koontz'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 | @ Eastern Michigan | L 17–28 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 1 |  Mississippi Valley State | W 52–0 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 2 | @ Fresno State | L 3–49 | 4.7 | 1 | 8 | 8.0 | 0 | 8 |
| 3 |  North Dakota State | L 10–31 | 4.3 | 1 | 6 | 6.0 | 0 | 6 |
| 4 |  Massachusetts | L 6–35 | 5.1 | 1 | 11 | 11.0 | 0 | 11 |
| 6 | @ Bowling Green | L 10–38 | 5.3 | 2 | 11 | 5.5 | 0 | 7 |
| 7 |  Ohio | L 7–48 | 3.7 | 1 | 4 | 4.0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2026 · 5 games | 4.6 | 6 | 40 | 6.7 | 0 | 11 | ||
2026 Season Stats
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 6 | 876th / 1995 |
| Yards | 40 | 1139th / 1981 |
| Yards / catch | 6.7 | — |
| Touchdowns | 0 | — |
| Long | 11 | — |
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 2 · Fresno State | — | 66 | ~22 (10–31) | 1 | 33% |
| Wk 3 · North Dakota State | — | 66 | ~22 (10–31) | 1 | 33% |
| Wk 4 · Massachusetts | — | 77 | ~23 (11–33) | 1 | 30% |
| Wk 6 · Bowling Green | ✓ TE | 63 | ~49 (42–59) | 3 | 78% |
| Wk 7 · Ohio | ✓ TE | 52 | ~41 (35–50) | 3 | 79% |
| Season | 2 GS | 458 | 157 (108–211) | 9 | 34% |
Position Room
7 TEs on the Sacramento State roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordan Williams | TE | 15 | 122 | 0 | 12% | -0.06 | ||
| 82 | Kyle Koontz | TE | SO | 6 | 40 | 0 | 5% | -0.06 |
| 85 | Elijah Huddle | TE | SO | 1 | 9 | 0 | 2% | +0.65 |
| 84 | Jahlil Lindsey | TE | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 86 | Jack Hodge | TE | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 87 | Luke Meeker | TE | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 88 | Cedric Anton | TE | JR | — | — | — | 3% | -0.47 |
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. Sacramento State depth chart →