
Why: heavy usage, soft matchup
vs DEN: allows 26.9 PPR/g to WR, rank 25/32 (Tough). Trailing WR PPR allowed per game, weeks before 2026 W2. Descriptive context, never a model input.
Primary passer Trevor Lawrence. 2025 share of pass targets to WR (359/539). Descriptive context, never a model input.
2026 Week 1 consensus PPR projection (WR48), from tank01 getNFLProjections (consensus, PPR). Descriptive draft-prep context, not a start/sit call.
Small sample (5 games). Defense roster/scheme turnover means the unit from prior seasons may differ significantly. Descriptive context only, never a model input or driver of the start/sit call.
Snap %, target share and opportunities are descriptive usage: how the offense has deployed this player, not a forecast. Weeks shown: most recent 16.
WRschedule vs the rest of the league: 100 = league-average, >100 softer, <100 tougher; rank 1 = easiest of 32. Projected on 2025 defense. low-confidence early-season estimate. Descriptive context, not a start/sit call.
Jacksonville Jaguars: Parker Washington Parker Washington thrived in an expanded role after Travis Hunter’s injury, though his breakout season was somewhat overshadowed by the arrival of Jakobi Meyers at the trade deadline.
source ↗Parker Washington slowly but surely earned more playing time, and the team traded for Jakobi Meyers after Hunter suffered a season-ending injury. - Jacksonville wide receiver Jakobi Meyers was limited in practice all week with a thumb injur
source ↗| Week | Opp | Tgt | Rec | ReYd | ReTD | Car | RuYd | Snap% | Tgt% | PPR | Half | Std |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 W1 | vs | 2 | 2 | 40 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0% | 10% | – | – | – |
| 2025 W18 | vs | 6 | 5 | 44 | 0 | – | – | 79% | 19% | 9.4 | 6.9 | 4.4 |
| 2025 W17 | @ | 9 | 6 | 39 | 0 | – | – | 94% | 24% | 7.9 | 4.9 | 1.9 |
| 2025 W16 | @ | 8 | 4 | 45 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 86% | 23% | 8.6 | 6.6 | 4.6 |
| 2025 W15 | vs | 7 | 5 | 71 | 0 | – | – | 87% | 25% | 12.1 | 9.6 | 7.1 |
| 2025 W14 | vs | 10 | 4 | 39 | 1 | 3 | 9 | 83% | 32% | 14.8 | 12.8 | 10.8 |
| 2025 W13 | @ | 6 | 6 | 90 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 92% | 24% | 21.3 | 18.3 | 15.3 |
| 2025 W12 | @ | 6 | 4 | 50 | 1 | – | – | 84% | 20% | 15.0 | 13.0 | 11.0 |
| 2025 W11 | vs | 6 | 5 | 64 | 0 | – | – | 65% | 27% | 11.4 | 8.9 | 6.4 |
| 2025 W10 | @ | 3 | 3 | 41 | 0 | – | – | 44% | 13% | 7.1 | 5.6 | 4.1 |
| 2025 W9 | vs | 6 | 4 | 23 | 0 | – | – | 89% | 16% | 6.3 | 4.3 | 2.3 |
| 2025 W6 | vs | 4 | 4 | 39 | 0 | – | – | 90% | 18% | 7.9 | 5.9 | 3.9 |
| 2025 W5 | @ | 6 | 4 | 32 | 0 | – | – | 88% | 17% | 7.2 | 5.2 | 3.2 |
| 2025 W4 | vs | 7 | 4 | 30 | 0 | – | – | 98% | 35% | 7.0 | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| 2025 W3 | @ | 4 | 3 | 63 | 0 | – | – | 94% | 15% | 9.3 | 7.8 | 6.3 |
| 2025 W2 | vs | 12 | 6 | 68 | 0 | – | – | 93% | 28% | 12.8 | 9.8 | 6.8 |
| 2025 W1 | @ | 10 | 8 | 97 | 0 | – | – | 94% | 30% | 17.7 | 13.7 | 9.7 |
| 2024 W18 | vs | 10 | 9 | 123 | 1 | – | – | 94% | 29% | 27.3 | 22.8 | 18.3 |
Descriptive per-week usage and PPR output. Situational PBP cuts (red-zone, 3rd-down) and EPA/touch are planned for v2.
Based on 31 graded calls.
| Week | Opp | Call | Proj | Finish | Hit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 W18 | START | 13.8 | WR29 (9.4) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W17 | START | 14.1 | WR45 (7.9) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W16 | FLEX | 13.6 | WR45 (8.6) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W15 | START | 13.9 | WR28 (12.1) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W14 | FLEX | 11.0 | WR18 (14.8) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W13 | SIT | 9.9 | WR11 (21.3) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W12 | SIT | 9.3 | WR20 (15.0) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W11 | SIT | 8.3 | WR22 (11.4) | ✗ | |
| 2025 W10 | SIT | 9.7 | WR45 (7.1) | ✓ | |
| 2025 W9 | SIT | 10.1 | WR54 (6.3) | ✓ |
✓ and ✗ grade where a player finished, not his points: a call hits when he finished startable (top-24 RB/WR, top-12 QB/TE), even if he came in under his projection. How we grade