Jacob Cofie
Southern California · 2025–26 · 31 available game logs · Speculative compensation · Model-implied values by season · Linked seasons and observed career performance
Logged performance
965:59 minutes logged
- Games logged
- 31
- Minutes per game
- 31:10
- Points per game
- 9.8
- Rebounds / assists per game
- 6.8 / 2.0
| Basis | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Per game | 9.8 | 6.8 | 2.0 | 0.9 | 1.7 | 1.6 | 3.1 |
| Per 40 minutes | 12.6 | 8.8 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 4.0 |
| Season totals | 304 | 212 | 61 | 29 | 54 | 51 | 96 |
| Shot | Made–att. | Pct | Att/G | Att/40 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FG | 117–235 | 49.8% | 7.6 | 9.7 |
| 2P | 96–170 | 56.5% | 5.5 | 7.0 |
| 3P | 21–65 | 32.3% | 2.1 | 2.7 |
| FT | 49–79 | 62.0% | 2.5 | 3.3 |
| eFG% | Estimated TS% | 3PA / FGA | FTA / FGA | AST / TO |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 54.3% | 56.3% | 27.7% | 33.6% | 1.20 |
Accepted logged appearances only; absent games are not zeroes. † marks a rate on fewer attempts than the floor (field goal 100, three-point 50, free throw 25). Floors are descriptive, not model output. Definitions
Speculative compensation · 2025–26β
USC · Power 4 · 2025–26 · a best guess at this player's part of the school's own revenue-sharing budget for men's basketball.
- Speculative best guess
- $815K
- 80% range $490K to $1.45M
- Median share of team pool
- 22.2%
- team pool $3.55M, 80% range $2.60M to $4.95M
- Across scenarios Z1 to Z4
- $815K in all four
- the elasticity disagreement is carried, not resolved
- Floor part
- $20K
- shared by every player with possessions
- Possession share
- 75.7%
- Sufficient evidence
Speculative best guess, not observed pay. It is not a contract, not an offer and not a market price, and it is unvalidated: no pay is held to check it against. Point is the median and the range is the 10th to 90th percentile of 4,000 joint draws of budget and player value; a mixture of assumptions, not a calibrated interval.
Budget anchor. House-settlement $20.5M cap (College Sports Commission, 2026-10-01) times a modelled utilisation of about 97 percent times a men's basketball share of about 18 percent (school statements and an industry study); Power 4 schools are at or near the cap nationally.
Assumptions. modelled pool; split by possession share times value over replacement; convexity; shared floor; replacement level; four elasticity scenarios; closure to the national total; opt-out list; exclusions. Each is a declared judgement, not an estimate. Numbers, anchors and checks
Not included. Third-party and collective NIL deals, including deals cleared through NIL Go. Non-cash benefits such as scholarship, cost of attendance, Alston awards and housing. Bonuses and incentive terms. Anything outside the school's own revenue-sharing channel.
USC: whole-roster table and pool · School finances (school-reported) · What-if calculator for this player
No revenue-sharing budget existed before the 2025–26 season, so no compensation figure is modelled for earlier seasons.
What-If Calculator · Speculativeβ
Re-runs the 4,000 joint draws with your inputs. The address saves your inputs.
Model-implied value and speculative compensation by seasonβ
| Season | Team | Speculative compensation (best guess) | Compensation 80% range | Split role | Net | Range | Evidence | Range graphic. Position on one axis | Offense | Defense | Wins above replacement | On-court possessions | Sample and flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | USC | $815Kspeculative | $490K to $1.45M | descriptive: not used in fit or gates | +3.3 | +2.0 to +4.6 | Sufficient evidence | +0.5 | +2.8 | +5.6range +5.1 to +6.2 | 3,301 | Season detail | |
| 2025 | Virginia | None: no budget that season | — | evaluation: examined, post hoc | +1.0 | -0.0 to +2.0 | Sufficient evidence | +0.4 | +0.6 | +2.5range +2.2 to +2.9 | 1,729 | Season detail |
Open circle: limited evidence. Filled circle: sufficient evidence. Vertical line: zero. This table makes no claim about change over time, so it has no change column or trend. Seasons 2011 to 2017 have a point value but no range, so none is shown. Compensation exists for 2025–26 only; earlier rows say that no budget existed. NIL methodology · Compensation methodology
Game log
| Measure | Graphic | Last five | Listed games | Range |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minutes | 28:34 | 31:10 | 15:38–40:16 | |
| Points | 9.4 | 9.8 | 1.0–23.0 | |
| Game eFG% | 48.0% | 54.5% | 0.0%–100.0% |
| Date | Opponent | Result | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast | Stl | Blk | TO | PF | FG | 3P | FT | eFG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-11 | Washington | L 79–83 | 38:55 | 14 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4-7 | 2-3 | 4-6 | 71.4% |
| 2026-03-07 | UCLA | L 68–89 | 33:03 | 10 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4-8 | 1-3 | 1-2 | 56.3% |
| 2026-03-04 | Washington | L 72–91 | 19:31 | 14 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 4-11 | 1-2 | 5-7 | 40.9% |
| 2026-02-28 | Nebraska | L 67–82 | 24:03 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3-6 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-24 | UCLA | L 62–81 | 27:20 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 1-7 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 21.4% |
| 2026-02-21 | Oregon | L 70–71 | 36:24 | 9 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 2-9 | 0-3 | 5-6 | 22.2% |
| 2026-02-18 | Illinois | L 65–101 | 35:25 | 14 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5-12 | 2-3 | 2-3 | 50.0% |
| 2026-02-11 | Ohio St. | L 82–89 | 38:30 | 12 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 5-9 | 2-4 | 0-0 | 66.7% |
| 2026-02-08 | Penn St. | W 77–75 | 34:46 | 10 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5-8 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 62.5% |
| 2026-02-03 | Indiana | W 81–75 | 30:18 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 5-5 | 66.7% |
| 2026-01-31 | Rutgers | W 78–75 | 36:59 | 15 | 10 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 6-11 | 0-2 | 3-6 | 54.5% |
| 2026-01-28 | Iowa | L 72–73 | 25:25 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2-5 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 40.0% |
| 2026-01-25 | Wisconsin | W 73–71 | 40:16 | 9 | 11 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4-11 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 40.9% |
| 2026-01-21 | Northwestern | L 68–74 | 35:35 | 9 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4-7 | 0-1 | 1-6 | 57.1% |
| 2026-01-17 | Purdue | L 64–69 | 35:23 | 13 | 15 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 6-9 | 1-2 | 0-2 | 72.2% |
| 2026-01-13 | Maryland | W 88–71 | 36:22 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 4-7 | 2-3 | 2-3 | 71.4% |
| 2026-01-09 | Minnesota | W 70–69 | 34:11 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 3-4 | 1-2 | 2-2 | 87.5% |
| 2026-01-05 | Michigan St. | L 51–80 | 33:08 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3-9 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 38.9% |
| 2026-01-02 | Michigan | L 66–96 | 15:38 | 1 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0-3 | 0-2 | 1-2 | 0.0% |
| 2025-12-17 | UTSA | W 97–70 | 20:29 | 12 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 5-6 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 83.3% |
| 2025-12-14 | Washington St. | W 68–61 | 35:09 | 21 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 9-12 | 0-1 | 3-6 | 75.0% |
| 2025-12-09 | San Diego | W 94–81 | 23:28 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 0-2 | 100.0% |
| 2025-12-06 | Washington | L 76–84 | 31:07 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 2-6 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 33.3% |
| 2025-12-02 | Oregon | W 82–77 | 36:01 | 17 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 6-10 | 2-3 | 3-4 | 70.0% |
| 2025-11-26 | Arizona St. | W 88–75 | 29:26 | 11 | 8 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 4-6 | 0-1 | 3-3 | 66.7% |
| 2025-11-25 | Seton Hall | W 83–81 | 32:15 | 7 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3-9 | 0-2 | 1-1 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-24 | Boise St. | W 70–67 | 31:00 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 2-6 | 2-5 | 1-2 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-20 | Troy | W 107–106 | 33:16 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-14 | Illinois St. | W 87–67 | 31:30 | 8 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3-8 | 1-4 | 1-2 | 43.8% |
| 2025-11-09 | Manhattan | W 114–83 | 24:03 | 10 | 10 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5-10 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11-03 | Cal Poly | W 94–64 | 27:03 | 23 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 9-12 | 1-1 | 4-4 | 79.2% |