Skip to content
Tahj Bullock

#12Tahj Bullock

QB·Akron·2024

Tahj Bullock is a Dual-Threat QB for Akron. Tahj's 2024 season ranks in the 0th percentile nationally by opponent-adjusted EPA per play across 68 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 Tahj Bullock'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.

2024 Production

Passing
22/30 Comp/Att200 Pass yards0 Pass TD0 INT73.3% Comp %
Rushing
138 Rush yards8 Rush TD53 Carries2.6 Yards/carry
Receiving
10 Receptions63 Rec yards0 Rec TD6.3 Yards/rec

Performance Analysis · 2024 · vs QB peers

  • Efficiency0
  • Volume32
  • Dual-Threat100
  • Consistency0
  • Clutch0
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)0th %ile · below avg
Game-to-game consistency0th %ile · below avg
Key findings
  • Below-average efficiency vs QB peers — value comes through volume, not per-play impact.
  • High game-to-game variance — boom-or-bust profile.
  • Peak game: 1.88 EPA/play in Wk 6 vs Bowling Green (SP+ -2).

NIL Market Tier· 2024

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.

Game Log · box score + EPA, week by week

+1.8801.88Wk 1 vs Ohio State: +0.23 EPA/play1Wk 2 vs Rutgers: -0.21 EPA/play2Wk 3 vs Colgate: +0.35 EPA/play3Wk 4 vs South Carolina: -0.03 EPA/play4Wk 5 vs Ohio: -1.15 EPA/play5Wk 6 vs Bowling Green: +1.88 EPA/play6Wk 7 vs Western Michigan: +1.35 EPA/play7Wk 9 vs Eastern Michigan: +0.10 EPA/play9Wk 10 vs Buffalo: +0.07 EPA/play10Wk 12 vs Northern Illinois: -0.42 EPA/play12Wk 13 vs Kent State: +0.04 EPA/play13Wk 14 vs Toledo: +0.39 EPA/play14
EPA per play · x-axis: weekabove 0 = added points · below = lost
WkOpponentResultOpp SP+C/ATTPass YdsPass TDINTQBRRush YdsRush TDEPA/play
1@Ohio StateL6-5231.29/13680074.04200.23
2@RutgersL17-496.43/313002.300-0.21
3vsColgateW31-201/170084.80.35
4@South CarolinaL7-5016.92/370040.610-0.03
5@OhioL10-302.3-1.15
6vsBowling GreenL20-27-1.8511.88
7@Western MichiganL24-34-10.22/2180092.51421.35
9vsEastern MichiganW25-21-13.32/3360061.01720.10
10vsBuffaloL30-41-4.01/224000.3100.07
12@Northern IllinoisL16-29-3.510-0.42
13@Kent StateW38-17-33.00/100065.23520.04
14vsToledoW21-14-2.52/2270063.02210.39

Usage & Situational · Pro

Snap-share proxy
Overall
11.3%
Passing plays
9.5%
Rushing plays
14.1%
Standard downs
12.4%
Passing downs
9.4%
EPA by down type
Standard downs
0.48
Passing downs
-0.10
Pass / Rush EPA
0.20 / 0.45

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.