Pipeline
NFL production
Signing classes 2013 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
- CB2
- DE2
- LB2
- DT1
- IOL1
- QB1
- S1
Program year analysis and class DNA metrics for LSU (2013).
2013 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 2013 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
The 2013 recruiting class for LSU displayed a mix of outcomes that reflect various levels of player development. The class, originally ranked 7th in the nation, saw a slight reevaluation to 6th in the S2S analysis, indicating that while the overall talent level remained high, certain players did not perform as expected. With a blue chip percentage of 56%, LSU was able to attract a significant number of highly-rated prospects, yet several of the top recruits did not meet their potential.
The presence of four notable misses, all ranked recruits who failed to deliver impactful careers, highlights the challenges faced in converting high expectations into on-field performance. Conversely, the inclusion of Duke Riley as a hit demonstrates that even lower-ranked players can exceed recruitment projections and develop into key players. This insight into the development patterns suggests that while LSU successfully identified talent, there were also critical missteps in player evaluation or development that led to underperformance among some recruits.
Overall, the LSU 2013 recruiting class met expectations in some areas while falling short in others. The S2S rerank moving slightly down from 7 to 6 suggests that although the class was strong, some of the highest-ranked recruits did not perform up to their potential, particularly in the case of those labeled as busts. The balance between hits and misses illustrates the inherent unpredictability of recruiting outcomes.
In conclusion, while the class did feature successful players, it ultimately underperformed relative to the high expectations set by its initial ranking, leaving key opportunities on the table for the program.