Pipeline
NFL production
Signing classes 2015 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
- DE2
- RB2
- DT1
- S1
- TE1
- WR1
Program year analysis and class DNA metrics for Tennessee (2015).
2015 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 2015 · NFL signee counts by recruit position
The 2015 recruiting class for Tennessee showed a mix of outcomes, with several players exceeding their original recruiting expectations. The class initially ranked 4th nationally but dropped to an 11th-place S2S rerank, indicating a decline in anticipated performance. This suggests that while some recruits flourished, others did not contribute significantly to the team's success.
Among the standout performers, Jauan Jennings and Alvin Kamara emerged as hits, both achieving NFL Pro Bowl status, which is impressive considering their original rankings. Jennings, ranked 151, and Kamara, ranked 2, illustrate the potential for high-impact players within the class. Their success highlights the ability of the Tennessee program to develop talent even from the mid-range rankings.
On the other hand, the presence of ranked recruits like Sheriron Jones and Andrew Butcher as misses indicates that not all expectations were met. Their outcomes reflect a failure to translate high school success into college-level performance. This class features a considerable number of contributors, as indicated by the outcome scores of several players, which points to a degree of effective recruitment but ultimately led to a downtrend in the overall class performance.
Overall, the Tennessee 2015 recruiting class met some expectations while falling short in others. The notable rise in S2S rank from 4 to 11 suggests that the program faced challenges in maximizing the potential of its recruits. The class did include standout players who reached high outcomes, which positively impacted the overall assessment. However, the number of busts among ranked players indicates that not all expectations were fulfilled. Thus, while there were significant hits, the overall performance reflects a mixed outcome for the class.