Skip to content
Brady Cook

#12Brady Cook

QB·Missouri·20239.0 pts line valueDay 2 (Rds 2–3)

Brady Cook is a Dual-Threat QB for Missouri. Brady's 2023 season ranks in the 43th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 470 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 Brady Cook'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

Passing
243/367 Comp/Att3302 Pass yards21 Pass TD6 INT66.2% Comp %
Rushing
319 Rush yards8 Rush TD113 Carries2.8 Yards/carry

Performance Analysis · 2023 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency43
  • Volume100
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency91
  • Clutch82
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)43th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency91th %ile · elite
Key findings
  • High-volume role — one of the team's most-used QBs by play share.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 5 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.
  • Peak game: 0.68 EPA/play in Wk 11 vs Tennessee (SP+ 16).

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 · QB · 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
Stetson BennettGeorgia0.63512.5323.0
Kyle McCordSyracuse0.50912.1321.4
Tanner MordecaiSMU0.63014.0321.5
Sam HartmanWake Forest0.55611.8359.6
Ryan HigginsLouisiana Tech0.58613.7334.6

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.6800.68Wk 1 vs South Dakota: +0.46 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Middle Tennessee: +0.39 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Kansas State: +0.40 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs Memphis: +0.63 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Vanderbilt: +0.62 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs LSU: +0.32 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Kentucky: +0.32 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs South Carolina: +0.50 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Georgia: +0.26 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Tennessee: +0.68 EPA/play11Wk 12 vs Florida: +0.39 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Arkansas: +0.38 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1vsSouth DakotaW35-1017/211721066.51710.46
2vsMiddle TennesseeW23-19-9.514/192042067.5-510.39
3vsKansas StateW30-2716.223/353562064.2210.40
4vsMemphisW34-273.518/253412090.41700.63
5@VanderbiltW38-21-12.733/413954087.9600.62
6vsLSUL39-4919.130/474112263.3-700.32
7@KentuckyW38-2110.519/291671172.94010.32
8vsSouth CarolinaW34-124.314/241981088.66410.50
10@GeorgiaL21-3031.214/302121272.03900.26
11vsTennesseeW36-716.218/242751187.95510.68
12vsFloridaW33-316.820/343311066.91110.39
13@ArkansasW48-143.512/201122075.21410.38
20vsOhio StateW14-325.211/181281078.0660

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
54.8%
Passing plays
98.5%
Rushing plays
19.0%
Standard downs
46.7%
Passing downs
73.4%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.34
Passing downs
0.55
Pass / Rush EPA
0.42 / 0.45

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

Career · rolling EPA, game by game

Per-game EPA5-game avg
+0.73+0.17
EPA per play · 2023 · 13 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.