2026 Draft Board: Quarterbacks
If you've ever read one of my draft board articles before then you have an idea of what you'll see below, but I did overhaul the system a little bit. Basically I just moved all of my formulas over to using a z-score method. If you haven't read them, quick explanation, I use stats, athletic testing, past performances from current pro players, and formulas to try and determine the chances a prospect in the current draft has at succeeding as a pro. In the past I used a "PSR", and an "A Met" and "S Met" to give every player a round grade. Now, it all comes down to a Score. The scores differ by position, so before each draft board I will put what the high score was between the 2020-2023 drafts at that position (those are draft years that I've done this for, as well as ones that have been in the league for at least 3 years). And at the bottom you will see a small blurb I wrote up for each position.
Real quick additional note: I'm including a "My Top 5" section this year. You will notice with some positions that the top 5 doesn't line up with the top five on the actual draft board. There's a reason for that. When I grade out the pros to determine the "success rate" factor, I actually give them a grade (A = Superstar, B = High-end starter, C = Solid Starter, D = Rotational at best, and F = Fail). I hadn't considered using that in the past, but I realized I can use it to get a little more granular when it comes to ranking them. Sometimes a guy that is lower on my draft board than another guy, actually has a higher chance of being a high-end starter or better. So along side the name of the player and their school, I will include a B+ which is just the percent chance they have of being a high-end starter or better, and a C+ which will be the percent chance they have of being a solid starter or better.
This will be updated as pro day results become available.
High Score: 67.59 (Joe Burrow - 2020)
My Draft Board
| Players | College | Score | Rounds |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diego Pavia | Vanderbilt | 58.59 | Day 1 |
| Haynes King | Georgia Tech | 49.63 | Day 2 |
| Fernando Mendoza | Indiana | 49.24 | Day 2 |
| Ty Simpson | Alabama | 44.67 | Day 2 |
| Sawyer Robertson | Baylor | 42.77 | Day 2 |
| Carson Beck | Miami | 41.37 | Day 2 |
| Joey Aguilar | Tennessee | 40.79 | Day 2 |
| Joe Fagnano | UCONN | 36.17 | Day 2 |
| Luke Altmyer | Illinois | 35.66 | Day 2 |
| Drew Allar | Penn State | 31.18 | Day 3 |
| Jalon Daniels | Kansas | 31.16 | Day 3 |
| Behren Morton | Texas Tech | 29.16 | Day 3 |
| Cade Klubnik | Clemson | 0.00 | Undrafted |
| Cole Payton | North Dakota St. | 0.00 | Undrafted |
| Garrett Nussmeier | LSU | 0.00 | Undrafted |
| Taylen Green | Arkansas | 0.00 | Undrafted |
My Top 5:
1) Fernando Mendoza (Indiana): B+ = 30.56, C+ = 30.56
2) Haynes King (Georgia Tech): B+ = 30.56, C+ = 30.56
3) Diego Pavia (Vanderbilt): B+ = 29.82, C+ = 57.02
4) Ty Simpson (Alabama): B+ = 10.10, C+ = 10.10
5) Sawyer Robertson (Baylor): B+ = 10.10, C+ = 10.10
Things worth noting:
-A few things to note with my Top 5. First, I'm not blind, I realize that Pavia's C+ is significantly larger than Mendoza's and King's, and that they only narrowly beat Pavia out in the B+ category. However, ALL 30.56% of that B+ for Mendoza and King actually falls under the A category, so I moved them up. Second, I also realize that King has the edge over Mendoza in their actual score, however, King got that edge because he did his athletic testing and he still barely got past Mendoza, which should show how much more Mendoza did in the stat metric. And that's why it's Mendoza, then King, then Pavia.
-As impressive as Taylen Green's and Cole Payton's Combine performances were, they both had a factor that falls into my "Empty" categories. And, somewhat surprisingly, Quarterback is one of a handful of positions left that have not had a player beat the rap when it comes to those categories (that is from the first big overhaul I did to the system in 2020). Garrett Nussmeier and Cade Klubnik did as well.
-As an Alabama fan, I love Ty Simpson. Putting that aside, if I'm a GM of a team, I'm not taking him in the first unless I already have an established veteran in place that will allow Simpson to stay on the bench for at least a season. The Rams really are the best situation in my mind. It's not because of "lack of starts", my numbers actually go by a minimum number of pass attempts and he surpassed that. It's because watching him last season I saw one major concern: he has to learn to work better under pressure. And I don't just mean not panicking, but also reacting quicker to what he's seeing.
-Sleeper: Joey Aguilar. There's a plus-factor, it's actually three categories combined, but in order to complete the trifecta he would have had to run his forty. I believe he would've hit below the mark for the forty, and that's why he snags this spot for me. Having said that, I will say that if there's a Brock Purdy-esque player in this draft, it's Haynes King. He really reminds me of Purdy in the aspect of a QB that doesn't necessarily have premier arm traits, but saw extensive playing time and was a winner at a school that isn't one of your typical blue blood programs.
I've been tracking the success rate of each position individually based on my grades from 2020-2023, and I'm going to include that for each position. It might help shine a light on some of my "things worth noting."
