Pipeline
NFL production
Signing classes 2014 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
- TE1
Program year analysis and class DNA metrics for Missouri (2014).
2014 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 2014 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
The 2014 recruiting class for Missouri presented a mixed bag of outcomes, showcasing both promising talent and significant underperformance. With 29 total recruits, the class was highlighted by low blue-chip representation at just 10%. This statistic suggests that the program relied heavily on lower-ranked recruits to fill out the roster, which is often a challenging strategy in the competitive SEC landscape.
Missouri saw some success with players like Ish Witter and Kenya Dennis, both of whom were able to achieve starting roles despite their original rankings of 1121 and 107, respectively. Their ability to perform at a "College Starter" level indicates effective player development within the program. However, the class also featured notable misses, particularly with Andy Bauer and Lawrence Lee, who underperformed relative to their higher rankings.
Overall, while Missouri managed to produce a couple of hits from lower-ranked recruits, the overall performance of the 2014 class did not fully meet the expectations set by their original recruiting rankings.
The Missouri 2014 recruiting class largely underperformed against the expectations established at the time of recruitment. The S2S rerank dropped significantly from 36 to 102, reflecting a disappointing realization of potential among many recruits. The notable presence of "Bust" outcomes among higher-ranked players contributed to this decline, indicating that while some lower-ranked athletes exceeded their projections, the overall class fell short of delivering the expected talent level.
The key takeaway from this class is that while Missouri successfully developed some players into starters, the overall impact of the class was diminished by the failure of higher-ranked recruits to contribute meaningfully.