#8Braedyn Locke

QB·Wisconsin·2024

Braedyn Locke is a Dual-Threat QB for Wisconsin. Braedyn's 2024 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 296 plays — a developing rate for the QB.

What projects, and what doesn't · QBs · held out 2019-2025

How well one season predicts the next, measured on seasons the model never trained on. 1.00 would be perfectly predictable; 0.00 means last year told us nothing.

Usage share (volume)0.46
Beats guessing the QB average by 16%. n=2,421 QB seasons
EPA per play (efficiency)0.05
Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=1,965 QB seasons
Total EPA (value)0.51
Beats guessing the QB average by 20%. n=1,965 QB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Braedyn Locke's projection is a projection of opportunity — how much of the offense he runs through. How well he converts it is something this model does not claim to know a year in advance, and the number above is why.

2024 Production

Passing

164/296 Comp/Att1936 Pass yards13 Pass TD10 INT55.4% Comp %

Rushing

4 Rush yards2 Rush TD22 Carries0.2 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs QB peers

Efficiency0
Volume100
Dual-Threat82
Consistency66
Clutch33

Player type

Dual-Threat QB

A genuine rushing threat who stresses defenses horizontally. Extends plays with legs and forces extra gap assignments.

Rushing threatScrambles for valueStresses defensive structure

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg

Game-to-game consistency66th %ile · average

Key findings

▸Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
▸High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
▸3 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
▸Production faded as the season progressed — 0.25 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
▸Peak game: 0.90 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs Purdue (SP+ -16).

NIL Market Tier· 2024

On3 valuation ↗

Starter

Meaningful starter. Local collective + position-group deals.

Tier is a model estimate based on position, school brand, performance rank, and usage — not a reported deal. NIL deals are private. For a real market valuation, see On3's NIL profile, which factors in social following and actual deal tracking.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	C/ATT	Pass Yds	Pass TD	INT	QBR	Rush Yds	Rush TD	EPA/play
3	vsAlabama	L10-42	25.0	13/26	125	1	0	52.2	-15	0	0.12
5	@USC	L21-38	11.9	13/26	180	1	1	33.7	—	—	0.13
6	vsPurdue	W52-6	-16.2	20/31	359	3	2	73.9	—	—	0.90
7	@Rutgers	W42-7	6.4	20/28	240	1	1	91.7	6	1	0.44
8	vsNorthwestern	W23-3	-8.2	14/24	160	1	1	37.7	12	1	0.21
9	vsPenn State	L13-28	24.6	22/42	217	0	1	54.2	—	—	0.04
10	@Iowa	L10-42	15.8	15/29	137	1	2	30.7	20	0	0.05
12	vsOregon	L13-16	26.0	12/28	96	1	1	19.9	-4	0	-0.03
13	@Nebraska	L25-44	5.5	20/30	292	3	1	80.5	-1	0	0.46
14	vsMinnesota	L7-24	10.4	15/32	130	1	0	32.6	-14	0	0.05

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

49.6%

Passing plays

97.4%

Rushing plays

4.3%

Standard downs

38.1%

Passing downs

75.0%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.24
Passing downs: 0.21
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.22 / 0.31

Usage = share of team plays (CFBD has no true snap counts).