Efficiency & Role
EPA = expected points added per play. Compared with every FBS WR/TE who qualifies
Advanced
Computed from every play, garbage time excluded. FBS rank among players with enough volume
| Receiving | Value | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Targets | 8 | — |
| Target share | 6.6% | — |
| Catch rate | 12.5% | — |
| Success rate per target | 12.5% | — |
| Yards per target | 0.4 | — |
| Explosive catches | 0.0% | — |
| Deep-target rate | 37.5% | — |
| 3rd-down targets | 2 | — |
| Red-zone targets | 3 | — |
Charting
Where Bork's plays went: throw and catch spots, air yards and yards after the catch, read from the play-by-play
Where he's targeted9 targets charted
Game Log
Emmett Bork's box score, game by game, from ESPN, with a 0–10 game score for each (hover it for how it works). Click a result for the full game
| Receiving | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk | Opponent | Result | Game score | Rec | Yds | Y/R | TD | Long |
| 1 | vs Notre Dame | L 13–41 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 2 |  Western Illinois | W 36–9 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 3 |  Eastern Michigan | W 54–10 | 6.3 | 1 | 7 | 7.0 | 1 | 7 |
| 4 | @ Penn State | W 24–20 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 5 |  Michigan State | W 31–3 | 3.2 | 1 | 3 | 3.0 | 0 | 3 |
| 7 | @ UCLA | L 7–17 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 8 |  USC | W 24–7 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 9 | @ Iowa | L 0–30 | — | no stats recorded | ||||
| 2026 · 2 games | 4.8 | 2 | 10 | 5.0 | 1 | 7 | ||
2026 Season Stats
FBS rank among qualifying players
| Receiving | 2026 | FBS rank |
|---|---|---|
| Receptions | 2 | 1510th / 2089 |
| Yards | 10 | 1774th / 2074 |
| Yards / catch | 5 | — |
| Touchdowns | 1 | 412th / 914 |
| Long | 7 | — |
Snaps by Game
Estimated snaps from a model trained on real NFL snap counts. Ranges in brackets are where the real number lands 80% of the time: wide for a single game, tighter over the season. How it works
| Game | Start | Team plays | Est. snaps | Plays involved | Penalties | Snap share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wk 1 · Notre Dame | — | 61 | ~18 (8–26) | 1 | · | 30% |
| Wk 2 · Western Illinois | ✓ TE | 53 | · | · | · | — |
| Wk 3 · Eastern Michigan | — | 63 | ~40 (34–48) | 4 | · | 63% |
| Wk 4 · Penn State | — | 66 | ~12 (6–18) | 1 | 1 | 18% |
| Wk 5 · Michigan State | — | 62 | ~34 (16–49) | 2 | · | 55% |
| Wk 7 · UCLA | — | 48 | ~19 (9–27) | 1 | 1 | 40% |
| Season | 1 GS | 461 | 123 (85–165) | 9 | 2 | 27% |
Position Room
7 TEs on the Wisconsin roster, ordered by rec
| # | Player | Pos | Class | Rec | Yds | TD | Tgt share | EPA/play |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 89 | Jacob Harris | TE | SR | 17 | 264 | 3 | 13% | +0.56 |
| 85 | Grant Stec | TE | JR | 6 | 25 | 0 | 8% | -0.12 |
| 82 | Emmett Bork | TE | SO | 2 | 10 | 1 | 7% | -0.21 |
| 84 | Ryan Schwendeman | TE | SR | 1 | 6 | 0 | 2% | +0.22 |
| 17 | Nizyi Davis | TE | SO | — | — | — | — | — |
| 49 | Aydon Fickell | TE | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
| 86 | Jack Sievers | TE | FR | — | — | — | — | — |
Stats, EPA and usage come from CollegeFootballData.com and refresh daily. FBS ranks only count players with enough volume for the stat to mean something. Qualifying for EPA takes 4+ plays per team game. Wisconsin depth chart →