#13Cooper Hoch

WR·San José State·2026

Cooper Hoch is a Red Zone Weapon WR for San José State.

2026 Usage Outlook · projected share of team plays

projected

band 2%'25 3%9%

Regressed toward the WR mean. Model correlation r≈0.47 on a 2019-2025 walk-forward — volume only; efficiency not projected.

What projects, and what doesn't · WRs · 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)0.47
Beats guessing the WR average by 16%. n=6,302 WR seasons
EPA per play (efficiency)0.09
Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=5,767 WR seasons
Total EPA (value)0.45
Beats guessing the WR average by 12%. n=5,767 WR seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Cooper Hoch'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.

2026 Production

Receiving

14 Receptions216 Rec yards3 Rec TD15.4 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2026 · vs WR peers

Efficiency100
Volume27
Explosiveness56
Consistency50
Pass-Down0

Player type

Red Zone Weapon WR

Goes from good to great inside the 20 — high TD conversion on limited looks makes this receiver a scoring machine.

Red zone targetHigh TD rateSize/catch radius advantage

Peer percentiles

Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite

Key findings

▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸Peak game: 2.38 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Eastern Michigan (SP+ -16).

NIL Market Tier· 2026

On3 valuation ↗

Elite

Top-3 player at position nationally. Collective + national brand 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.

Historical Comparables · WR · efficiency + volume + value

Players from 2013–2025 matched on EPA efficiency, play volume, and adjusted value tier — not just one metric.

Player	Team	Yr	Plays	WEPA/play	Line val	Total EPA
Quadree Henderson	Pittsburgh	2016	63	0.530	1.6	33.4

Comps are statistical — efficiency, volume, and value tier all factor in. Style and conference context differ.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

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

Wk	Opponent	Result	Opp SP+	Rec	Rec Yds	Avg	Rec TD	Long	EPA/play
0	@USC	L26-42	17.7	2	24	12.0	0	13	—
1	@Eastern Michigan	W27-21	-15.6	5	115	23.0	2	51	2.38
2	vsCal Poly	W30-20	—	7	77	11.0	1	32	0.37

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

9.4%

Passing plays

18.7%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

8.0%

Passing downs

11.8%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 1.08
Passing downs: 0.74
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.92 / —

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