Skip to content
Cole Spence

#16Cole Spence

Cole Spence is a Versatile TE for Vanderbilt.

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 Cole Spence'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
15 Receptions233 Rec yards2 Rec TD15.5 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs TE peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume10
  • Explosiveness57
  • Consistency74
  • Pass-Down31
Player type
Versatile TE

Balanced profile without a single dominant trait — contributes across multiple dimensions.

Balanced usageMulti-role
Peer percentiles
Opponent-adjusted EPA (WEPA/play)100th %ile · elite
Game-to-game consistency74th %ile · average
Key findings
  • Top-10% efficiency among TEs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • High game-to-game consistency — reliable floor each week.
  • 4 high-impact games (EPA/play > 0.4) this season — elite ceiling.
  • Strong second-half surge — EPA/play improved 0.09 from the first to second half of the season.
  • Peak game: 3.00 EPA/play in Wk 10 vs Texas (SP+ 16).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

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 · 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
Ty ThompsonTulane0.4200.720.2
Seth GreenMinnesota0.3900.032.4
Johnny LanganRutgers0.3000.017.7
Evan SvobodaWyoming0.2900.521.8
Jordan MyersRice0.2700.215.9

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+3.0003.00Wk 4 vs Georgia State: -0.30 EPA/play4Wk 6 vs Alabama: +1.28 EPA/play6Wk 8 vs LSU: +1.50 EPA/play8Wk 10 vs Texas: +3.00 EPA/play10Wk 11 vs Auburn: +0.27 EPA/play11Wk 13 vs Kentucky: +1.57 EPA/play13
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
4vsGeorgia StateW70-21-24.512626.0026-0.30
6@AlabamaL14-3014.824522.50331.28
8vsLSUW31-2410.355611.21211.50
10@TexasL31-3416.212323.00233.00
11vsAuburnW45-3811.6144.0140.27
13vsKentuckyW45-171.834816.00271.57
20vsIowaL27-3419.723115.5021

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
3.4%
Passing plays
6.3%
Rushing plays
0.0%
Standard downs
3.8%
Passing downs
2.5%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.66
Passing downs
0.54
Pass / Rush EPA
0.63 / —

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.