Pipeline
NFL production
Signing classes 2016 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
- CB2
- DT1
- LB1
- OT1
- TE1
Program year analysis and class DNA metrics for Nebraska (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
The 2016 Nebraska recruiting class displayed a mix of outcomes that suggest a program capable of developing talent, particularly among lower-ranked recruits. With a total of 23 commits and a blue chip percentage of 22, the class had a solid foundation, but the outcomes varied significantly. The S2S rerank from 36 to 17 indicates a positive reassessment of the class based on performance, highlighting the potential for growth and development that the coaching staff may have fostered.
Several players, including Jack Stoll and Tanner Lee, exceeded expectations significantly. Stoll transitioned from a lower ranking to become an NFL Starter, while Lee, originally unranked, was drafted into the NFL. These outcomes illustrate the program's ability to identify and develop talent beyond initial recruiting rankings.
Conversely, the presence of Bust outcomes among higher-ranked players, such as Bryan Brokop and Quayshon Alexander, showcases the challenges inherent in recruiting. While the class yielded notable hits, the underperformance of some higher-ranked recruits indicates a mixed result in achieving the anticipated success levels. This dichotomy of outcomes presents a complex picture of Nebraska's recruitment strategy in 2016.
Overall, the 2016 Nebraska recruiting class met expectations, as evidenced by the significant number of players who achieved outcomes that exceeded their original rankings. The S2S rerank suggests that the coaching staff effectively developed prospects, particularly unranked and lower-ranked players. However, the presence of several Bust outcomes among ranked recruits indicates areas for improvement. The key takeaway is that while the class produced several successful players, the inconsistency among higher-ranked recruits serves as a reminder of the unpredictable nature of talent evaluation.