We’ve reached the final phase of this prospect deep dive, shifting from running backs to the position everyone’s been waiting for: quarterbacks.
This year’s QB class is widely viewed as thin. There’s a clear top option expected to go No. 1 overall, but the depth behind him drops off quickly, with most prospects carrying more questions than answers.
Beyond the top two, this class becomes difficult to project in terms of draft order and landing spots. With that in mind, here’s a look at my top 10 quarterbacks, why they’re ranked where they are, and when they might come off the board.
1. Fernando Mendoza, QB, Indiana
6’5”, 236lbs, 31 ⅞” arms, 9 ½” hands
The presumptive No. 1 overall pick, Mendoza emerged from relative obscurity this past season to win the Heisman and lead Indiana to an undefeated run capped by a CFP Championship.
On film, Mendoza’s strengths show up before the snap and within the pocket. He reads quickly, identifies openings, and delivers accurate throws with a consistent base. While he leans toward being a pocket passer, he’s more athletic than he looks and can extend plays when needed.
There are still areas of concern. Mendoza is not viewed as a generational talent, and his effectiveness outside the hashes can be inconsistent, particularly when throwing on the move. He can also get rattled under heavy pressure in the pocket.
Additionally, some have questioned how much of his breakout season was driven by Curt Cignetti’s system and whether that production will translate at the next level. That projection will be one of the key storylines following the draft.
Projection: #1 pick
2. Ty Simpson, QB, Alabama
6’1”, 211lbs, 30 ⅞” arms, 9 ⅜” hands
Simpson is the son of a coach, and it shows on tape. The Alabama one-year starter opened the season as well as anyone, quickly exceeding expectations and entering the Heisman conversation.
Simpson is at his best in rhythm. He diagnoses coverages pre-snap, works through reads quickly, and operates with timing you typically see from more experienced quarterbacks. Combined with his ability to handle protections and make adjustments at the line, he has the football IQ and work ethic to thrive in a structured offense.
The limitations are physical. Simpson lacks top-tier arm talent and does not have the prototypical size teams look for at the position. He struggles to consistently drive the ball downfield and has had issues with ball security.
He could still draw first-round interest, but in a stronger quarterback class, Simpson would fall into the second- or third-round range.
Projection: Mid-to-Late 1st
3. Garrett Nussmeier, QB, LSU
6’2”, 203lbs, 30 ⅜” arms, 9 ⅛” hands
Nussmeier was viewed by many as the top quarterback entering the 2025 season, but LSU’s year never found its footing, ultimately leading to the firing of Brian Kelly. He fell short of expectations, later revealing he had been playing through a misdiagnosed abdominal injury that impacted his ability to throw with full velocity.
At his best, the tools are evident. His Senior Bowl performance offered a reminder of his upside. Nussmeier has high-end arm talent, with the ability to attack every level of the field, a quick release, and strong intermediate-to-deep accuracy. He is comfortable both inside and outside the pocket and throws well on the move.
The injury provides some context, but it also raises new concerns, particularly around durability. His frame is on the lighter side, and with multiple injuries already on his record, teams will question whether he can hold up to NFL-level contact. Without that reliability, there is a real possibility he settles into a backup role.
Projection: Mid-to-Late 2nd
4. Carson Beck, QB, Miami
6’5”, 233lbs, 30 ⅝” arms, 10” hands
Beck transferred to Miami looking to rebuild his draft stock after a long-term elbow injury impacted his play at Georgia in 2024. His run to the CFP Championship likely helped stabilize that trajectory. Beck showed he can win games, and his arm talent looked much improved post-injury. His accuracy remains a strength, particularly when it comes to ball placement in tight windows and late-game situations.
Not all concerns were resolved, which is why his stock hasn’t fully rebounded. There are questions about whether the elbow injury has permanently affected his deep ball, which remains inconsistent. Off the field, evaluators have also noted concerns about his demeanor, particularly in how he handles adversity and accountability.
Ultimately, Beck could face scrutiny similar to former USC quarterback Matt Barkley, whose draft stock dropped following injury. Beck’s path may follow a similar trajectory.
Projection: Early 4th
5. Cade Klubnik, QB, Clemson
6’2”, 207lbs, 31 ⅛” arms, 9 ¼” hands
Like Nussmeier, Klubnik entered 2025 with high expectations but failed to meet them. Clemson’s season never found consistency, and neither did Klubnik.
At his best, he is efficient and capable of moving the ball in the intermediate passing game. He operates well off play action and in movement-based concepts, staying in rhythm while also showing the ability to improvise as plays develop. When he’s comfortable, Klubnik reacts quickly after the snap and can pressure defenses with both his arm and his legs.
The concerns show up before the snap. Klubnik struggles to diagnose defenses pre-snap and tends to rely on reaction rather than anticipation, which will be tested at the next level. He also lacks high-end arm strength, limiting his ability to consistently capitalize on downfield opportunities as plays break down.
Projection: Early-to-Mid 4th
6. Taylen Green, QB, Arkansas
6’6”, 227lbs, 34 ¾” arms, 9 ⅞” hands
Green is one of the most athletic quarterback prospects in recent memory, and that profile was on full display at the Combine. At 6’6”, 227 pounds, he pairs rare size with top-end speed, explosiveness, and strength, making him an imposing presence in the pocket.
He also flashes high-end downfield ability. Green has the arm strength to push the ball vertically and the touch to hit receivers in stride, giving him real big-play upside. Combined with his mobility and ability to escape pressure, the physical tools are easy to project.
The concerns are significant. His career completion percentages are low, and he struggles to consistently process defenses. His athleticism can work against him, as he often abandons the pocket prematurely instead of stepping up and maintaining structure as pressure builds off the edge.
Green is a high-upside developmental quarterback. He will generate interest based on traits alone, but at this stage, he is more of a long-term project than a reliable option.
Projection: Mid-to-Late 5th
7. Drew Allar, QB, Penn State
6’5”, 228lbs, 32 ¾” arms, 9 ⅞” hands
Allar entered college as the prototype at the position, and that hasn’t changed. At his size, with a quick release and NFL-level arm strength, he will continue to draw interest based on traits alone. The three-year starter protects the ball well and can settle into a rhythm when he starts fast.
That’s what makes the concerns more frustrating. Despite his size, Allar does not handle pressure well, often allowing the pocket to collapse instead of stepping up and using his frame to his advantage. Some of that ties back to his processing, as he struggles to consistently move beyond his first read.
The biggest issue is his mechanics. Allar’s footwork is not close to pro-ready. He loses his base under pressure and fails to establish it on quick throws, which impacts both accuracy and timing.
Allar has the physical makeup of an NFL quarterback, but from a technical standpoint, he remains a long-term project with a wide range of outcomes.
Projection: Mid-to-Late 5th
8. Cole Payton, QB, NDSU
6’3”, 232lbs, 31 ⅝” arms, 10 ¼” hands
Payton is Allar without the fanfare. The one-year starter enters the draft with a pro-ready frame and strong overall athleticism. He has a powerful arm, is comfortable pushing the ball downfield, and adds value with his ability to tuck and run.
The level of competition raises legitimate questions. Playing in the FCS leaves uncertainty about how his traits will translate against NFL-caliber defenses. Beyond that, he is still developing as a passer, with inconsistent mechanics leading to uneven results on short throws.
There are clear risks, but the upside is intriguing. Given his physical tools, Payton could be viewed as a more appealing developmental gamble than Allar.
Projection: Mid 6th
9. Sawyer Robertson, QB, Baylor
6’4”, 216lbs, 32 ⅛” arms, 9 ⅜” hands
Robertson is a dual-threat quarterback who improved as a passer over the course of his college career. He moves well outside the pocket, creates with his legs, and has the ability to push the ball downfield on both intermediate and deep routes.
He projects lower in the draft due to raw technique and inconsistent habits. His footwork can break down, leading to accuracy issues, and questionable decision-making has contributed to high turnover numbers. To develop beyond a low-end backup, Robertson will need significant improvement in both his mechanics and his ability to work through progressions.
Projection: Late 6th
10. Luke Altmeyer, QB, Illinois
6’2”, 210lbs, 29 ⅞” arms, 9” hands
Altmeyer fits the definition of a classic game manager. He works efficiently through his reads, rarely takes unnecessary risks, and operates comfortably within structure. He is effective in the play-action game, selling the run and working into developing reads. When he finds a rhythm, Altmeyer can consistently move the offense without forcing throws.
The limitations are tied to his physical profile. Altmeyer lacks size and does not generate high-end arm velocity, which limits his ability to challenge defenses downfield. He is also vulnerable in the pocket, struggling to anticipate pressure and taking hits others avoid.
He projects as a career backup and spot starter who can keep a strong team competitive.
Projection: 7th
If this was your kind of read, you’ll like what’s next. Get The Sandman Ticket, our free, weekly newsletter with picks, insights, and a little bit of everything we love about sports.
