Skip to content
Justin Cook

#5Justin Cook

Justin Cook is a Pass-Catching Back for Pittsburgh.

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 Justin 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.

2025 Production

Rushing
31 Rush yards0 Rush TD9 Carries3.4 Yards/carry
Receiving
8 Receptions44 Rec yards0 Rec TD5.5 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs RB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume26
  • Explosiveness8
  • Consistency50
  • Receiving100
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
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs RB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • Particularly dangerous on passing downs — efficiency spikes in obvious pass situations.

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Contributor

Rotational contributor. Smaller collective or local 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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+0.4700.47Wk 10 vs Stanford: -0.47 EPA/play10Wk 14 vs Miami: +0.14 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+CarRush YdsAvgRush TDRecRec YdsRec TDEPA/play
10@StanfordW35-20-11.8150-0.47
14vsMiamiL7-3820.7133.001900.14
20vsEast CarolinaL17-238.08283.506300

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
9.0%
Passing plays
8.6%
Rushing plays
10.3%
Standard downs
10.1%
Passing downs
6.8%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
-0.29
Passing downs
1.18
Pass / Rush EPA
0.03 / -0.10

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.
Justin Cook Stats, EPA & Player Profile — Pittsburgh · Gridpex