Pipeline
NFL production
Signing classes 2016 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
- TE2
- CB1
- QB1
Program year analysis and class DNA metrics for SMU (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 recruiting class for SMU demonstrates a mixed bag of outcomes relative to original expectations. With an original class rank of 53, expectations were set for moderate contributions from the recruits. However, the S2S rerank of 106 suggests that the collective performance did not align with the anticipated trajectory for most players. The blue chip percentage of 7 indicates that the majority of recruits were not highly regarded, which often correlates with lower outcomes.
Despite this, there were notable hits within the class. Both Demerick Gary and Jamie Sackville emerged as college starters, showcasing the ability of lower-ranked and unranked recruits to exceed initial projections. This trend highlights the potential for development within the program, suggesting that coaching and player development may have positively influenced outcomes for certain recruits.
Conversely, the class also featured misses, particularly with Rafe Peavey, who failed to deliver on the promise associated with his high ranking. Trey Quinn's case is particularly interesting; while he was initially anticipated to be a contributor, he far exceeded expectations by being drafted into the NFL. This divergent path between expectations and outcomes underscores the unpredictability of recruiting success and the importance of player development.
Overall, the SMU 2016 recruiting class met varied expectations. While some recruits surpassed their anticipated contributions, others fell short of their rankings. The S2S rerank suggests that the collective performance did not improve significantly, even though individual players like Gary and Sackville found success. The presence of both hits and misses indicates a program in transition, with potential for growth in future recruiting efforts. The key takeaway is that while some recruits may underperform, others can significantly overachieve, leading to a diverse range of outcomes within a single class.