ReRank Breakdown: 2011 Washington State Recruiting Class

Class Snapshot

2011 class

Key numbers for this recruiting class

Original ranking67

S2S rerank117

Total recruits27

Blue chip %0%

Badges Earned

No class-year badges earned for this class.

S2S Class DNA

2011 class

One-year metrics for this recruiting class

Hits & Misses

Hit: Darryl Paulo (DL) — Originally ranked 1002. Outcome: College Starter. Paulo significantly exceeded expectations by securing a starting role in college, showcasing his ability to contribute at a high level despite a low original ranking. Hit: Dom Williams (WR) — Originally ranked 1059. Outcome: College Starter. Williams also emerged as a college starter, demonstrating that he could compete effectively at the next level after being ranked lower in the recruiting class. Hit: Darryl Monroe (LB) — Originally ranked 1095. Outcome: College Starter. Monroe's performance as a college starter reflects a positive outcome, surpassing the expectations set by his initial ranking. Hit: Teondray Caldwell (RB) — Originally ranked 1618. Outcome: College Starter. Caldwell's ascent to a college starter role shows that he exceeded the projections associated with his unheralded ranking. Hit: Marcus Mason (RB) — Originally ranked 1709. Outcome: College Starter. Mason's ability to start in college further emphasizes the class's success in developing talent despite low initial expectations. Hit: Isiah Myers (WR) — Originally ranked 1796. Outcome: College Starter. Myers succeeded in becoming a college starter, which is notable given his low recruiting position. Miss: Rico Forbes (OT) — Originally ranked 78. Outcome: Contributor. Forbes, while contributing to the team, did not reach the higher expectations that his ranking implied, marking him as a miss in this recruiting class. Miss: Taylor Meighen (IOL) — Originally ranked 98. Outcome: Contributor. Meighen's performance as a contributor falls short of expectations for a player with his ranking, identifying him as another miss from this class. Miss: Lenard Williams (EDGE) — Originally ranked 169. Outcome: Contributor. Williams contributed to the roster but did not fulfill the higher expectations associated with his ranking, making him a miss. Miss: Logan Mayes (EDGE) — Originally ranked 725. Outcome: Contributor. Mayes's outcome as a contributor indicates he underperformed relative to his expectations based on his ranking.

Development Story

The Washington State 2011 recruiting class showcased a notable trend in player development, particularly with a significant number of recruits achieving starting roles in college. Out of the 27 players in this class, six emerged as college starters despite being ranked outside of the top tier. This suggests a successful identification of talent by the coaching staff, who were able to develop players who were not highly regarded in the recruiting process.
Conversely, several players who were highly ranked failed to meet their potential, contributing minimally to the team. The four contributors from the higher-ranked recruits indicate that while there were some successes, the class also had its share of missed opportunities. The overall outcomes suggest a mixed bag, with a distinct pattern of lower-ranked recruits outperforming expectations, while a few higher-ranked players did not live up to their projected impact.
The S2S rerank dropped from 67 to 117, a reflection of the challenges faced by the class. This decline can be attributed to the failure of several highly ranked recruits to become significant contributors, coupled with the successful development of lower-ranked players. The data illustrates a clear narrative of overcoming initial recruitment expectations, yet also highlights areas where the team did not achieve its projected potential.

Outcome Summary

Overall, the Washington State 2011 recruiting class outperformed expectations primarily due to the success of lower-ranked recruits who became college starters. The S2S rerank decline indicates that while the program found success in developing talent, the higher-ranked players did not deliver as anticipated. This class serves as a reminder that recruiting rankings do not always correlate with future success on the field, particularly when it comes to player development.
Takeaway: The 2011 recruiting class for Washington State demonstrated the potential for development beyond rankings, with several low-ranked recruits achieving significant roles in college.

Published: May 31, 2026•Read time: 4 min•639 words