Pipeline
NFL production
Signing classes 2016 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
No recruits from this era reached the NFL.
Program year analysis and class DNA metrics for Air Force (2016).
2016 recruiting class — expectation versus Stars2Stats outcomes
Class medals
“Built on development, not recruiting rankings.”
S2S Class DNA
One-year metrics for this recruiting class
Recruits that contributed to program
Share who became impact players (starters, elite contributors, or NFL)
Based on only Low HS Projection → All-Conference or higher
Recruits that reached the NFL in any tier
Share with limited verified outcomes
Pipeline
Signing classes 2016 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
No recruits from this era reached the NFL.
The 2016 recruiting class for Air Force comprised a diverse group of players, with a total of 34 recruits, but without any blue chip athletes. The class was originally ranked 85th, indicating a struggle to attract highly touted recruits. However, the S2S rerank dropped to 124, suggesting that the overall performance of the recruits did not match initial expectations.
Despite the challenges, the program found success in developing several unranked recruits into college starters. Geraud Sanders, Donald Hammond III, Jake Ksiazek, and Lakota Wills all emerged as starters, demonstrating the program's capacity to identify and cultivate talent from unexpected backgrounds. The outcomes of these players highlight a trend where Air Force effectively maximized the potential of lower-ranked or unranked recruits.
On the flip side, the class also included several misses. Players like Barrett McDonald and Braden Smith, who were ranked, did not live up to their projected contributions, resulting in bust outcomes. This contrast between the hits and misses reflects the mixed results of the recruiting efforts, wherein the program succeeded in developing some talent while failing to meet the expectations set by others.
Overall, the Air Force 2016 recruiting class met expectations, particularly through the development of unranked players into college starters. The drop in S2S ranking from 85 to 124 indicates that while the program found some success, the overall talent acquisition did not translate as effectively on the field for many recruits. The class exemplifies a mix of both promising developments and disappointing outcomes.
In summary, the 2016 class showcased the potential for development within the Air Force program, highlighting their ability to cultivate talent even from less heralded recruits.