Position-U · Career-credit methodology
Fullback Position-U Rankings
Stars2Stats ranks programs by the production, development beyond recruiting expectations, consistency, and elite outcomes of their eligible fullback signees from the published 2004–2016 recruiting classes.
2004–2016 recruiting classes · 38 ranked programs · Data through 2026-09-07
Thin-sample board: only 44 eligible fullback signees and 38 programs with at least one appear here. Many schools are ranked on a single player, so treat this more like best signed talent than deep development depth.
What the score measures
Stars2Stats evaluates fullback outcomes associated with each program’s recruited players. Thin-sample Fullback U: only exact FB recruiting labels are included (~42 eligible players; many programs have a single fullback). Any school with at least one eligible fullback is ranked. Athlete and unresolved hybrid labels are excluded. Confidence is separate from rank. Earnings do not determine the headline score.
Production · 35%
Total demonstrated outcomes from eligible fullback signees.
Development · 35%
How outcomes compared with recruiting expectations.
Consistency · 20%
How often a program produced positive outcomes across recruiting classes.
Elite Ceiling · 10%
Capped credit for the highest-level outcomes.
Rankings
Official ranks come from the Position-U snapshot. Scores are normalized within the eligible fullback ranking population.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
| Official rank | Program | Overall | Production | Development | Sample | Confidence | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.4 | 2.4 | 0.6 | 3 | Limited confidence | ||
| 2 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 1.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 3 | 0.9 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 2 | Limited confidence | ||
| 4 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 5 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 0.6 | 2 | Limited confidence | ||
| 6 | 0.6 | 1.1 | 0.1 | 2 | Limited confidence | ||
| 7 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 8 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 10 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 11 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 12 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 13 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 14 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 15 | 0.2 | -0.0 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 16 | 0.2 | -0.0 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 17 | 0.2 | -0.0 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 18 | 0.2 | -0.0 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 19 | 0.1 | -0.5 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 20 | 0.1 | -0.5 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 21 | 0.1 | -0.5 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 22 | 0.1 | -0.5 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 23 | 0.1 | -0.5 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 24 | 0.1 | -0.5 | 0.6 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 25 | 0.0 | 0.5 | -0.4 | 2 | Limited confidence | ||
| 26 | -0.1 | -0.0 | -0.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 27 | -0.1 | -0.0 | -0.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 28 | -0.1 | -0.0 | -0.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 29 | -0.2 | 0.9 | -2.1 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 30 | -0.3 | -0.5 | -0.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 31 | -0.3 | -0.5 | -0.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 32 | -0.3 | -0.5 | -0.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 33 | -0.4 | -1.0 | -0.1 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 34 | -0.9 | -0.5 | -2.1 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 35 | -0.9 | -0.5 | -2.1 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 36 | -2.0 | -2.1 | -1.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 37 | -2.3 | -2.1 | -2.4 | 1 | Limited confidence | ||
| 38 | -2.4 | -2.2 | -2.3 | 1 | Limited confidence |
Technical methodology details
Methodology version: position_u_v2_career_credit_60_35_5
Snapshot ID: FB__position_u_v2_career_credit_60_35_5__published-2004-2016__b0dbed21817a
Data revision: published-2004-2016-cutoff-20260907
Expectation baseline uses star rating first with national-rank fallback. Scoring model is a balanced hierarchical composite (Production 35%, Development 35%, Consistency 20%, Elite Ceiling 10%).
Confidence and sample guidance
- High confidence — solid sample, class coverage, and expectation coverage with balanced contribution.
- Medium confidence — usable sample with some coverage or concentration caveats.
- Limited confidence — interpret cautiously; sample or coverage is thin or highly concentrated.
- Not ranked — below competitive sample thresholds; no official Position-U rank.
Methodology
C1 composite with player-level career outcome and 60/35/5 school credit (college / NFL launch / origin recruiting). Unused launch weight returns only to the college-contribution pool. Top contributors are ranked by schoolPositionUPoints.
- Eligible years: published 2004–2016 recruiting classes.
- A player’s career result can be split across schools. Credit is 60% college contribution, up to 35% NFL launch (gated by participation), and 5% original recruiting. Unused launch share returns only to the college-contribution pool.
- Walk-ons who were not recruited into the cohort are outside the ranking.
- Fullback uses the same published methodology version as every other Position-U ranking except QB U.
- Thin-sample Fullback U: only exact FB recruiting labels are included (~42 eligible players; many programs have a single fullback). Any school with at least one eligible fullback is ranked. Athlete and unresolved hybrid labels are excluded.
- Headline model: Career-credit Position-U composite (Production / Development / Consistency / Elite Ceiling).
- NFL earnings are supporting evidence only, scaled by schoolCredit, and are not part of the headline score.
- Career-credit: 60% college contribution, 35% NFL launch, 5% origin recruiting. Destination schools may sit outside the published origin window.
- Top contributors are the 3 highest schoolPositionUPoints at the school, not original-signee outcome.
- Ranked programs need at least 1 eligible player.
Rankings cover published recruiting classes 2004–2016. Additional position rankings are added only after data and methodology validation.
Related exploration
- Quarterback Position-U rankings
- Wide Receiver Position-U rankings
- Running Back Position-U rankings
- Tight End Position-U rankings
- Offensive Tackle Position-U rankings
- Interior Offensive Line Position-U rankings
- Defensive End Position-U rankings
- Defensive Tackle Position-U rankings
- Linebacker Position-U rankings
- Cornerback Position-U rankings
- Safety Position-U rankings
- Program directory
- 2016 recruiting class ReRankings