#33Ryder Kusch

TE·Temple·2025

Ryder Kusch is a Red Zone Weapon TE for Temple.

What projects, and what doesn't · TEs · 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)0.42
Beats guessing the TE average by 9%. n=2,225 TE seasons
EPA per play (efficiency)0.04
Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=2,016 TE seasons
Total EPA (value)0.46
Beats guessing the TE average by 13%. n=2,016 TE seasons

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

2025 Production

Receiving

13 Receptions60 Rec yards3 Rec TD4.6 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

Efficiency50
Volume12
Explosiveness0
Consistency0
Pass-Down0

Player type

Red Zone Weapon TE

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)50th %ile · average

Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg

Key findings

▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
▸High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
▸Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.14 from the first to second half of the season.
▸Peak game: 0.56 EPA/play in Wk 1 vs Massachusetts (SP+ -37).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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 · TE · 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
Robby Preckel	Northwestern	2025	42	0.060	0.1	2.5
A.J. Doyle	Massachusetts	2013	53	0.040	0.0	2.1
Blake Bell	Oklahoma	2013	63	0.070	0.1	4.4
Kaden Feagin	Illinois	2024	52	0.150	0.0	7.8
Jaheim Bell	South Carolina	2022	73	0.110	0.0	8.0

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
1	@Massachusetts	W42-10	-36.6	3	14	4.7	2	9	0.56
2	vsHoward	W55-7	—	1	4	4.0	0	4	0.13
3	vsOklahoma	L3-42	18.3	2	19	9.5	0	19	-0.13
4	@Georgia Tech	L24-45	9.3	2	1	0.5	0	2	-0.48
7	vsNavy	L31-32	6.2	1	0	0.0	0	0	-0.90
10	vsEast Carolina	L14-45	8.0	2	12	6.0	0	9	0.22
11	@Army	L13-14	0.8	—	—	—	—	—	—
13	vsTulane	L13-37	6.3	1	8	8.0	0	8	-0.04
14	@North Texas	L25-52	13.8	1	2	2.0	1	2	0.29

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy

Overall

4.3%

Passing plays

9.1%

Rushing plays

0.0%

Standard downs

4.0%

Passing downs

4.8%

EPA by down type

Standard downs: 0.32
Passing downs: -0.30
Pass / Rush EPA: 0.05 / —

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