Pipeline
NFL production
Signing classes 2010 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
- DE2
- LB1
- WR1
Program year analysis and class DNA metrics for Cincinnati (2010).
2010 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 2010 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
The Cincinnati Bearcats' 2010 recruiting class features a total of 23 commits, with a notable blue chip percentage of 4. The class was originally ranked 66 and saw a slight improvement in the S2S rerank at 54, indicating a better-than-expected performance relative to initial assessments. The class includes a mix of players who exceeded expectations and those who did not live up to their rankings.
The development of several recruits into college starters highlights the program's ability to cultivate talent from various rankings. Notably, players like Munchie Legaux, Kevin Schloemer, and Solomon Tentman transitioned from lower-ranked prospects to important contributors, filling key roles on the team. The presence of multiple college starters from this class points towards effective player development strategies and the potential for future success with recruits outside of the top-tier rankings.
Conversely, the class also included recruits who did not meet expectations. Dyjuan Lewis, originally ranked 197, was marked as a contributor but fell short of the impact anticipated from a player of his ranking. Shepherd, ranked at 950, categorized as a bust, further underscores the variability in player outcomes based on initial recruiting evaluations.
Overall, the 2010 recruiting class for Cincinnati can be characterized as having slightly underperformed based on expectations set by their original rankings. While the S2S rerank improved, the class produced several college starters, which contributed positively to the program's depth. However, the presence of misses among higher-ranked recruits indicates that not all expectations were met. The key takeaway from this evaluation is that while the class had a mix of successful outcomes, the overall performance suggests a need for continued refinement in evaluating and developing talent.