Skip to content
A.J. Doyle

#15A.J. Doyle

TE·Massachusetts·20130.0 pts line value1st Round

A.J. Doyle is a Slot Specialist TE for Massachusetts. A.J.'s 2013 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 255 plays — a developing rate for the TE.

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 A.J. Doyle'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.

2013 Production

Passing
128/235 Comp/Att1274 Pass yards6 Pass TD11 INT54.5% Comp %
Rushing
151 Rush yards0 Rush TD65 Carries2.3 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2013 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume100
  • Explosiveness0
  • Consistency0
  • Pass-Down53
Player type
Slot Specialist TE

The offense's primary passing-down weapon — routes, separation, and reliability on 3rd down define this role.

3rd-down converterRoute technicianHigh passing-down share
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs TE peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used TEs by play share.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.

Historical Comparables · TE · 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
Kaden FeaginIllinois0.0400.04.6
Cole GautscheNew Mexico0.1701.017.7
Johnny LanganRutgers0.2400.028.1
Kaden FeaginIllinois0.1800.017.6
Connor BlumrickTexas A&M0.2300.024.4

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

Game Log · EPA per play, week by week

+0.6300.63Wk 1 vs Wisconsin: +0.17 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Maine: -0.21 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Kansas State: +0.21 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Vanderbilt: +0.12 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Bowling Green: -0.28 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Miami (OH): +0.04 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs Buffalo: +0.26 EPA/play8Wk 9 vs Western Michigan: +0.27 EPA/play9Wk 12 vs Akron: +0.01 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Central Michigan: -0.63 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Ohio: -0.08 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+EPA/playPassRush
1@WisconsinL0-4522.40.170.22-0.23
2vsMaineL14-24-0.21-0.21-0.10
3@Kansas StateL7-3721.70.210.27-0.02
4vsVanderbiltL7-247.50.120.19-0.15
6@Bowling GreenL7-289.8-0.28-0.34-0.08
7vsMiami (OH)W17-10-29.00.040.050.02
8@BuffaloL3-32-9.00.260.160.70
9vsWestern MichiganL30-31-25.50.270.35-0.01
12vsAkronL13-14-15.30.010.010.04
13@Central MichiganL0-37-18.8-0.63-0.790.62
14@OhioL23-51-11.4-0.08-0.11-0.03

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
39.7%
Passing plays
73.4%
Rushing plays
14.0%
Standard downs
32.3%
Passing downs
54.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.02
Passing downs
0.04
Pass / Rush EPA
0.02 / 0.08

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.360−0.72
EPA per play · 2013 · 11 games

Chart shows per-game EPA (bars) and rolling 5-game average (line). Season breaks marked with dashed lines. Line value = est. points over replacement per game.

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