Skip to content
Marcus Burke
Marcus Burke

#3Marcus Burke

WR·UCF·2025

Marcus Burke is a Versatile WR for UCF.

What projects, and what doesn't · WRs · 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)0.47
    Beats guessing the WR average by 16%. n=6,302 WR seasons
  • EPA per play (efficiency)0.09
    Not projectable — we do not forecast this. n=5,767 WR seasons
  • Total EPA (value)0.45
    Beats guessing the WR average by 12%. n=5,767 WR seasons

Across all positions, usage carries year to year at 0.47 and efficiency at 0.07. So Marcus Burke'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 Receptions181 Rec yards0 Rec TD13.9 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2025 · vs WR peers

  • Efficiency100
  • Volume14
  • Explosiveness46
  • Consistency79
  • Pass-Down100
Player type
Versatile WR

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 consistency79th %ile · above avg
Key findings
  • ▸Top-10% efficiency among WRs — elite opponent-adjusted EPA rate.
  • ▸Limited usage share suggests a rotational or specialist role.
  • ▸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: 2.20 EPA/play in Wk 8 vs West Virginia (SP+ -7).

NIL Market Tier· 2025

On3 valuation ↗
Star

Top-10 nationally. Multiple mid-to-large collective deals expected.

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 · WR · 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
Dane KinamonAir Force0.4100.716.0
Keytaon ThompsonVirginia0.3700.615.2
Micah DavisAir Force0.3700.616.3
JoJo NatsonUtah State0.3901.019.9
Savion WilliamsTCU0.4501.125.2

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

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+2.200−2.20Wk 1 vs Jacksonville State: +0.71 EPA/play1Wk 4 vs North Carolina: +0.77 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Kansas State: +1.49 EPA/play5Wk 7 vs Cincinnati: +0.09 EPA/play7Wk 8 vs West Virginia: +2.20 EPA/play8Wk 12 vs Texas Tech: +0.63 EPA/play12
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+RecRec YdsAvgRec TDLongEPA/play
1vsJacksonville StateW17-10-6.734314.30270.71
4vsNorth CarolinaW34-9-6.623517.50200.77
5@Kansas StateL20-347.024020.00301.49
7@CincinnatiL11-204.533311.00210.09
8vsWest VirginiaW45-13-6.811717.00172.20
12@Texas TechL9-4827.62136.5070.63

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
4.9%
Passing plays
9.2%
Rushing plays
0.4%
Standard downs
4.3%
Passing downs
6.2%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.14
Passing downs
0.90
Pass / Rush EPA
0.49 / -0.97

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.