Skip to content
Ron Cook Jr.

#2Ron Cook Jr.

Ron Cook Jr. is a Pass-Catching Back for Buffalo. Ron's 2023 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 150 plays — a developing rate for the RB.

What projects, and what doesn't · RBs · 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)0.52
    Beats guessing the RB average by 18%. n=4,219 RB seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.10
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=3,575 RB seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.41
    Beats guessing the RB average by 9%. n=3,575 RB seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Ron Cook Jr.'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.

2023 Production

Rushing
609 Rush yards6 Rush TD148 Carries4.1 Yards/carry
Receiving
29 Receptions220 Rec yards1 Rec TD7.6 Yards/rec
Returns
21 Kick returns375 KR yards0 KR TD9 Punt returns55 PR yards0 PR TD

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume57
  • Explosiveness22
  • Consistency66
  • Receiving69
Player type
Pass-Catching Back

Third-down weapon out of the backfield. Routes, hands, and separation in coverage define this role as much as rushing.

3rd-down backReceiving threatPass protection
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency66th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Production faded as the season progressed — 0.13 EPA/play decline from first to second half.
  • Peak game: 0.65 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs Central Michigan (SP+ -19).

NIL Market Tier· 2023

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.

Historical Comparables · RB · efficiency + volume + value

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

PlayerTeamWEPA/playLine valTotal EPA
Saquon BarkleyPenn State0.3403.997.9
Dalvin CookFlorida State0.3404.399.3

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.6500.65Wk 1 vs Wisconsin: +0.13 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Fordham: -0.06 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Liberty: +0.11 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Louisiana: +0.52 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Central Michigan: +0.65 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Bowling Green: +0.24 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Kent State: +0.36 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Toledo: +0.23 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Ohio: -0.01 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Miami (OH): -0.07 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.07 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
1@WisconsinL17-389.412514.3041400.13
2vsFordhamL37-4011524.70-0.06
3vsLibertyL27-558.07172.4045610.11
4@LouisianaL38-450.411484.4223200.52
5@AkronW13-10-21.617623.605260
6vsCentral MichiganW37-13-19.111534.821800.65
7vsBowling GreenL14-24-7.812473.9031800.24
8@Kent StateW24-6-26.39424.711600.36
10@ToledoL13-313.717975.7033500.23
11vsOhioL10-20-1.616483.004250-0.01
12@Miami (OH)L10-232.815493.301-20-0.07
13vsEastern MichiganL11-24-12.310434.311200.07

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
19.9%
Passing plays
7.6%
Rushing plays
32.0%
Standard downs
22.1%
Passing downs
14.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.06
Passing downs
0.58
Pass / Rush EPA
0.47 / 0.11

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

EPA = expected points added (opponent-adjusted). NIL estimates are model-based ranges, not reported deals. Data: CollegeFootballData. Not betting advice.