Usage Score
7.5
Player Dossier
2014-2018Purdue
Cole Herdman
TE • 6'4" • 245 lbs • Leesburg, VA, USA
Reliable chain-moverPossession profile
Cole Herdman reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Efficiency
53.6
Consistency
68.2
Season Value
42.3
Career Arc
Value trend by season
Best season by value score: 2016 Regular Season · Purdue
14151617171818
Snapshot
- Career Teams
- 1
- Seasons Tracked
- 7
- Program Path
- Purdue
- Peak Game
- Peak game by takeover score: Iowa
Scouting Read
Best season and peak-game context are pinned here so the rest of the page can stay analytical without losing the headline story.
Cole Herdman, TE. Best season Best season by value score: 2016 Regular Season · Purdue. Cole Herdman reads as a reliable chain-mover based on recent role and receiving efficiency.
Player insights
Lead takeaway
Best season by value score: 2016 Regular Season
Purdue paired 344 primary output with 67.6 efficiency.
Supporting note
2015 Regular Season role shape
target-driven usage with 53.6 efficiency.
Supporting note
Career value stayed steady
2018 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.
Supporting note
Peak game by takeover score: Nebraska
Win with an explosive receiving profile. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.
Analysis workspace
Season Workbench
Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and then drop into the full log without losing the story of the year.
Season Explorer
Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.
2015 Regular Season · Purdue
Games
11
Receiving Yards / G
12.6
Efficiency
53.6
Usage
7.5
Consistency
68.2
Best Game by takeover score
Indiana
Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.
Active game
Hover over a point
Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.
Game-by-Game Trend
Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.
Chronological game order.
Game by game trend chart. Marshall: 11. Unknown: 22. Virginia Tech: 13. Bowling Green: 10. Michigan State: 2. Minnesota: 10. Nebraska: 23. Illinois: 14. Northwestern: 7. Iowa: 16. Indiana: 11
Volume vs Efficiency
Each dot is a game. Farther right means the player carried more of the workload, and higher means they were more efficient with those chances.
Low volumeHigh quality
High volumeHigh quality
Low volumeLower quality
High volumeLower quality
Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.
Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. Marshall: 1 by 73.3. Unknown: 2 by 73.3. Virginia Tech: 2 by 43.3. Bowling Green: 1 by 66.7. Michigan State: 2 by 6.7. Minnesota: 1 by 66.7. Nebraska: 2 by 76.7. Illinois: 2 by 46.7. Northwestern: 1 by 46.7. Iowa: 2 by 53.3. Indiana: 2 by 36.7
Split Comparison
Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.
Losses10.4 · Games = 9
First Half11.3 · Games = 6 · -2.9 vs Second Half
Second Half14.2 · Games = 5 · +2.9 vs First Half
All Games12.6 · Games = 11
Game Log
Dense stat lines with inline explanations and season-linked highlights.
11 games
Featured metric
Receiving Yards
Top game by takeover score
Nebraska
Best efficiency game
76.7 vs Nebraska
| Result | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sat 11/28 | vs Indiana | L 36-54 | — | 2 | 11 | 5.5 | 5.50 | 1 | 9 |
| Sat 11/21 | @ Iowa | L 20-40 | — | 2 | 16 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 9 |
| Sat 11/14 | @ Northwestern | L 14-21 | — | 1 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
| Sat 11/7 | vs Illinois | L 14-48 | — | 2 | 14 | 7 | 7 | 0 | 8 |
| Sat 10/31 | vs Nebraska | W 55-45 | — | 2 | 23 | 11.5 | 11.50 | 0 | 13 |
| Sat 10/10 | vs Minnesota | L 13-41 | — | 1 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 1 | 10 |
| Sat 10/3 | @ Michigan State | L 21-24 | — | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Sat 9/26 | vs Bowling Green | L 28-35 | — | 1 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
| Sat 9/19 | vs Virginia Tech | L 24-51 | — | 2 | 13 | 6.5 | 6.50 | 0 | 7 |
| Sat 9/12 | vs Unknown | — | — | 2 | 22 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 13 |
| Sun 9/6 | @ Marshall | L 31-41 | — | 1 | 11 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 11 |
Career Arc
Track team changes, role shifts, and season-to-season movement.
- 1
Purdue
2014-2018
Opening stop
Season Progression
2014201520162017201720182018
| Season | Team | Primary | Efficiency | Usage | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 Regular Season | Purdue | 0 | — | — | — |
| 2015 Regular Season | Purdue | 139 | 53.6 | 7.5 | 139 |
| 2016 Regular Season | Purdue | 344 | 67.6 | 10.7 | 205 |
| 2017 Postseason | Purdue | 331 | 72.8 | 7.5 | -13 |
| 2017 Regular Season | Purdue | 331 | 72.8 | 7.5 | 0 |
| 2018 Postseason | Purdue | 196 | 64.9 | 8.6 | -135 |
| 2018 Regular Season | Purdue | 196 | 64.9 | 8.6 | 0 |
Signature Performances
Top Games
#1 Featured game
Iowa
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
104
Primary metric
104 receiving yards with a 99 efficiency score.
#2
Ohio
87
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
87 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#3
Ohio State
36
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
36 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#4
Indiana
31
Primary metric
Win with an explosive receiving profile.
31 receiving yards with a 100 efficiency score.
#5
Missouri
36
Primary metric
Loss with an explosive receiving profile.
36 receiving yards with a 80 efficiency score.
Top Seasons
#1 Season by value score
2016 Regular Season · Purdue
344 primary output · 67.6 efficiency · 10.7 usage
56
#2
2017 Postseason · Purdue
54.8
331 primary · 72.8 efficiency · 7.5 usage
#3
2017 Regular Season · Purdue
54.8
331 primary · 72.8 efficiency · 7.5 usage
Milestones
1
100+ receiving yards
0
8+ catch outings
0
2+ TD games
Bio, Recruit, and Data Context
Recruit Profile
2★
Class 2014 · Rating 0.7711
Flint Hill School · Oakton, VA
- Committed To
- Purdue
- Commit Date
- Jan 1, 2014
Career Facts
1
Career teams
7
Seasons tracked
1,010
Career Receiving Yards
Data Context
Coverage spans 7 tracked seasons, 45 games, and base opponent context only. Derived metrics fall back to raw production when share or rating context is missing.