HawkShack.com

Here is a list of some of the 2025 draft class of QBs. The rankings are from Allaccessfootball - formerly NFLDraft Bible.
Every year QBs expected to shine fall and others seemingly come out of the woodwork so these rankings are just a guide of the better QBs for the upcoming draft.
It might give you a reason to check out a CFB game if you have the time in the fall.

For me, there are a couple of dark horses I'm going to try to keep an eye on.
Tyler Van Dyke (#21) who transferred from Miami and showed early in his time there that he might be something special but the new HC changed the Offense so it didn't show off his talents.
Kurtis Roarke (#38) transferred from Ohio University and might be a surprise against better competition than the MAC.

1. Carson Beck, Georgia, rSr, 6042, 218, 4.80
2. Shedeur Sanders, Colorado, Sr, 6012, 198, 4.70
3. Jaxon Dart, Mississippi, Sr, 6020, 217, 4.65
4. Quinn Ewers, Texas, rJr, 6020, 195, 4.78
5. Jalen Milroe, Alabama, rJr, 6015, 220, 4.48
6. Conner Weigman, Texas A&M, rSo, 6026, 215, 4.67
7. Riley Leonard, Notre Dame, Sr, 6035, 212, 4.52
8. Miller Moss, USC, rJr, 6020, 200, 4.80
9. Noah Fifita, Arizona, rSo, 5106, 194, 4.74
10. Drew Allar, Penn State, Jr, 6040, 225, 4.80
11. Taylen Green, Arkansas, rJr, 6054, 225, 4.55
12. Donovan Smith, Houston, Sr, 6040, 237, 4.65
13. Rocco Becht, Iowa State, rSo, 6006, 205, 4.72
14. Cameron Ward, Miami, Sr, 6020, 220, 4.64
15. Kyron Drones, Virginia Tech, rJr, 6020, 234, 4.62
16. Kyle McCord, Syracuse, Sr, 6025, 221, 4.80
17. Byrum Brown, South Florida, rSo, 6030, 219, 4.58
18. Brady Cook, Missouri, Sr, 6015, 210, 4.65
19. Brock Vandagriff, Kentucky, rJr, 6030, 210, 4.65
20. Jalon Daniels, Kansas, rSr, 5116, 211, 4.55
21. Tyler Van Dyke, Wisconsin, rSr, 6040, 222, 4.90
22. DJ Uiagalelei, Florida State, rSr, 6042, 253, 4.90
23. Joey Aguilar, Appalachian State, Sr, 6027, 217, 4.77
24. Will Howard, Ohio State, rSr, 6040, 243, 4.80
25. Graham Mertz, Wisconsin, rSr, 6030, 215, 4.50
26. Dillon Gabriel, Oregon, rSr, 5110, 207, 4.70
27. Cameron Rising, Utah, rSr, 6014, 216, 4.75
28. Cade Klubnik, Clemson, Jr, 6017, 202, 4.70
29. Mark Gronowski, South Dakota State, 6022, 225, 4.70
30. Grayson McCall, North Carolina State, rSr, 6030, 200, 4.55
31. KJ Jefferson, UCF, rSr, 6031, 250, 4.75
32. Max Brosmer, Minnesota, rSr, 6014, 220, 4.80
33. Seth Henigan, Memphis, Sr, 6032, 205, 4.85
34. Hudson Card, Purdue, Sr, 6022, 207, 4.70
35. TJ Finley, Western Kentucky, rSr, 6070, 246, 5.12
36. Kaidon Salter, Liberty, rJr, 6006, 200, 4.48
37. Aidan Bowuan, South Dakota, rSr, 6053, 232
38. Kurtis Rourke, Indiana, rSr, 6042, 231, 4.63
39. Sam Huard, Utah, rJr, 6020, 220, 4.80
40. EJ Warner, Rice, Jr, 6002, 295, 4.75
41. Max Johnson, North Carolina, rSr, 6045, 226, 4.90
42. Gerry Bohanon, BYU, rSr, 6020, 221, 4.50
43. Garrett Nussmeier, LSU, rJr, 6015, 205, 4.75
44. Zach Zebrowski, Central Missouri, rJr, 6000, 210, 4.65
45. Matthew Sluka, UNLV, rSr, 6022, 216, 4.60
46. Tyler Shough, Louisville, rSr, 6046, 231, 4.78
47. Will Rogers, Washington, Sr, 6020, 211, 5.10
48. Zevi Eckhaus, Washington State, Sr, 6000, 205, 4.75
49. Preston Stone, SMU, rJr, 6010, 220, 4.80
50. Connor Watkins, Villanova, Sr, 6020, 225, 4.70

I assume that the Sanders kid out of Colorado is Prime Time's son? We probably need to steer clear of him simply due to the hype.

River_Dog wrote:I assume that the Sanders kid out of Colorado is Prime Time's son? We probably need to steer clear of him simply due to the hype.

Yah, he is and the other worry is meddling by the old man who has a big soap box to shout from.
He's already said there are teams he doesn't want his kid to be drafted by.

River_Dog wrote:I assume that the Sanders kid out of Colorado is Prime Time's son? We probably need to steer clear of him simply due to the hype.

NorthHawk wrote:Yah, he is and the other worry is meddling by the old man who has a big soap box to shout from.
He's already said there are teams he doesn't want his kid to be drafted by.

Yep, although I should have put it a little differently, that's what I was talking about when I mentioned the hype. At the very best, it would be a huge media distraction.

I think Cam Ward is a little low on that list. I think Cam Ward sticking around for his senior season is going to help place him in the first round of next years draft. I think the most pro ready QB of this class is Quinn Ewers. I missed when he was rocking the mullet, but he has managed to keep Arch Manning on the bench, which by most Colleges he would be starting at this point.

It will be an interesting year of CFB, no more Nick Saban who has been a fixture for quite some time, and of course Jim Harbaugh has moved on. Can Dabo Swinney get the Tigers back to top 5? Pac 12 is now the Pac 2? Well sort of I guess.. it will be a different year of CFB for sure with some potential new rivalries to forge.

I've come to the conclusion that QBs in College have success by their fit in the scheme their coaches design.
For instance if Brett Favre was on a team that didn't allow him to be the 'gunslinger' he was, he wouldn't have been the player he was.
QBs with stronger arms won't get to develop in more conservative systems. There are exceptions but for the most part if the College Offense doesn't match the skill set of the QB then he's going to suffer from a development PoV and subsequent
ratings by these types of scouting. You mention Cam Ward who has gone to Miami which their HC is very conservative and I worry that his skills won't be shown off or developed like they might be in a Kalen DeBoer type of Offense.

I also think the NIL situation makes it worse in that some kids might end up chasing the quick money at the expense of their playing development in the long term.
Maybe what we will end up seeing with the NIL more lower rated QBs doing well at the NFL level. I hope that happens - it will make things more interesting come draft day each year.

NorthHawk wrote:I've come to the conclusion that QBs in College have success by their fit in the scheme their coaches design.
For instance if Brett Favre was on a team that didn't allow him to be the 'gunslinger' he was, he wouldn't have been the player he was.
QBs with stronger arms won't get to develop in more conservative systems. There are exceptions but for the most part if the College Offense doesn't match the skill set of the QB then he's going to suffer from a development PoV and subsequent
ratings by these types of scouting. You mention Cam Ward who has gone to Miami which their HC is very conservative and I worry that his skills won't be shown off or developed like they might be in a Kalen DeBoer type of Offense.

I also think the NIL situation makes it worse in that some kids might end up chasing the quick money at the expense of their playing development in the long term.
Maybe what we will end up seeing with the NIL more lower rated QBs doing well at the NFL level. I hope that happens - it will make things more interesting come draft day each year.

I totally agree. I wouldn't expect someone like Cam Ward to be an immediate starter, but from own observations I think he has a dynamic skillset and his ceiling is quite high. I would still take him in the first round and sit him a year or so so he can develop into a solid starter, sort of like what the Rams did with Jared Goff where he wasn't ready to start right away.

College system can certainly inflate someone's numbers, I mean any Lincoln Riley QB is going to put up monster stats, but does that always mean a Lincoln Riley QB will do well in the NFL?

You bring up a very unique topic of its own with the NIL situations. To some degree the NCAA can restrict certain activities associated with NIL, for instance co-sponsoring alcohol or tobacco, however the open "gray" area of the NIL is how much and where the money comes from. This is something the NCAA has the court battle to control. In a weird way this gives college athletes, who are by definition unpaid by their representative universities, some serious control of their earnings. The conflict comes when you have a certain college program that has major endorsement, let's say like Gatorade, and the player signs product endorsement with AllSport or Celsius, and the player receives endorsement money through their NIL, this will certainly be an ongoing issue. I can also see athletes choosing schools based on how much they can earn through NIL. Next 5 to 10 years of College sports will definitely be different as it evolves into a semi pro league.

4XPIPS wrote:You bring up a very unique topic of its own with the NIL situations. To some degree the NCAA can restrict certain activities associated with NIL, for instance co-sponsoring alcohol or tobacco, however the open "gray" area of the NIL is how much and where the money comes from. This is something the NCAA has the court battle to control. In a weird way this gives college athletes, who are by definition unpaid by their representative universities, some serious control of their earnings. The conflict comes when you have a certain college program that has major endorsement, let's say like Gatorade, and the player signs product endorsement with AllSport or Celsius, and the player receives endorsement money through their NIL, this will certainly be an ongoing issue. I can also see athletes choosing schools based on how much they can earn through NIL. Next 5 to 10 years of College sports will definitely be different as it evolves into a semi pro league.

It's a little off topic, but I've pretty much tuned out of college football, and the NIL has been one of the biggest reasons, another being the implosion of the Pac 12 conference over purely financial interests. I can remember a time when Don James was against a playoff system because it came at a time when students, athletes and other students alike, were having to study for their end of quarter/semester finals. It's a case of the rich getting richer, as the NIL gives the bigger advantage over smaller schools as an athlete can make more money off their NIL.

The old system was good for the fans, but it really did a disservice to the players.
College Football is a multi billion dollar business almost rivaling the NFL in money made, but the players didn't get any of it.
The argument was that players got an education, but for the most part it was just a slight of hand for the players who were there just to play football (I suspect Basketball was similar) while at the same time the coaches and the executives of the teams along with the directors of the NCAA got very rich. If a player had his career ended by injury, well that's too bad and the game went on without him and the non playing personnel continued to get richer.
Now it's a mess, but at least we are seeing College sports as what they are and some of the players are getting paid as they should have always been.
I think once the transitional turmoil ends and it all settles down, things will be a lot better for both the fans and the players.

NorthHawk wrote:The old system was good for the fans, but it really did a disservice to the players.
College Football is a multi billion dollar business almost rivaling the NFL in money made, but the players didn't get any of it.
The argument was that players got an education, but for the most part it was just a slight of hand for the players who were there just to play football (I suspect Basketball was similar) while at the same time the coaches and the executives of the teams along with the directors of the NCAA got very rich. If a player had his career ended by injury, well that's too bad and the game went on without him and the non playing personnel continued to get richer.
Now it's a mess, but at least we are seeing College sports as what they are and some of the players are getting paid as they should have always been.
I think once the transitional turmoil ends and it all settles down, things will be a lot better for both the fans and the players.

I understand all that. It's no different than free agency in professional sports. It's great for the players, but it sucks for us fans as the players don't have the same sense of loyalty to a team and their fans that they were at least perceived to have had prior.

People sometimes wonder why I take such a dim view of players, why I won't wear their name/number on my back. That's one of the big reasons, that they are no longer loyal to their fans. Except as it relates to their own personal popularity and pocketbook, they couldn't give a rip about us fans. Russell Wilson proved that, telling bold faced lies to us on his way out the door. Making good money that 95% of us would die to have isn't good enough for them. They have to be the highest paid simply to fee their over inflated egos. I refuse to invest my soul in them, rather I've invested it in the team. Up until the past few years, CFB was immune to that kind of attitude.

CFB won't settle down for me in my lifetime, at least not to my satisfaction. I don't see the Pac-12 being reconstituted, at least not with the two LA teams. I don't see WSU and OSU playing in a Power 5 (or I guess Power 4 now) conference. And for as much crap as I have given them over the years, Coug fans were as loyal as they come.

I'm too damn old. I still remember players that, for the most part, spent the bulk of their careers with the same team and made middle class wages, making them more like one of us.

The evolution of college football into big business just sucks. The NIL, demolition of the PAC 12, and the reorganization and expansion of existing conferences has really changed the landscape. Yeah, my alma mater's conference, the SEC, is still intact, but the addition of two more teams (UTx and UOk; two Big 12 mainstays) has screwed up the scheduling. Two of MS State's longest standing matchups, Bama and LSU, are now on rotation instead of annual. They've been playing each other since 1896 and now that's over with. The regional conferences made the most sense.

To the OP, not a lot of the QBs coming up jump like the ones this past draft. With this group, I'm thinking it's another year of not drafting an early round QB. Seaside Joe on Fieldgulls liked Grayson McCall (formerly of Coastal Carolina) a lot. He was an efficient passer for CC until last season, though he missed time with a concussion. If he returns to form with NC State, he might worth taking in the middle rounds.

Most drafts have QBs going higher than they might from a talent/making a difference PoV. Some drafts are terrible because teams are searching for that one big payoff every year even in weak drafts. But as seen with us and Wilson and SF with Purdy, QBs can occasionally be found beyond the top 10 of the draft. Now with the concentration of teams in the big conferences, there might be fewer overall that are worthy of a top 10 selection, but maybe there are more 'diamonds in the rough' on so called lesser teams and divisions.

As far as college football evolving into big business, it has been big business for the last 20 or 30 years - maybe longer. The difference now is the players who actually produce the product are now getting a piece of the pie and it's out in the open.
The sad thing is the Executives that ran the NCAA were too greedy. It was so bad at one point that a player was suspended because a booster bought him a plane ticket so he could go home and visit his parent who was about to die.
So now they are paying the price. It remains to be seen if the product on the field will be any worse or better but I think the rivalries will continue between schools even if the Conferences are gone.

NorthHawk wrote:As far as college football evolving into big business, it has been big business for the last 20 or 30 years - maybe longer. The difference now is the players who actually produce the product are now getting a piece of the pie and it's out in the open.
The sad thing is the Executives that ran the NCAA were too greedy. It was so bad at one point that a player was suspended because a booster bought him a plane ticket so he could go home and visit his parent who was about to die.
So now they are paying the price. It remains to be seen if the product on the field will be any worse or better but I think the rivalries will continue between schools even if the Conferences are gone.

Sure it's been big business, but it's changed drastically in just the last few years.

Players getting compensation is way out of hand now. NIL and transfer portal has essentially become free agency in college football. Coaches can find the bigger, better deal at another school and take their recruits with them.

The big business aspect also largely respected the traditional conference arrangements until recently. Stanford to the ACC and Oregon, Washington, UCLA, and USC to the Big 10; Arizona, Arizona St, Utah, and Cal to the Big 12; UTx and UOk to the SEC was all about money. Traditional and regional rivalries are being thrown by the wayside. Really a shame.

I was under the impression that traditional rivalries will continue with the new alignments. There will still be intense emotional rivalries and hate even between teams no longer in the same conferences.
If I read that correctly, it's a smart move to make those exceptions. Oregon State knocking off Oregon for example could have even more impact if Oregon was in the mix for a National Championship just like it always has. The difference will be divisional bragging rights.

I have no problem with players getting paid. The pendulum was pulled too far to the side of the NCAA for too long but there are some concerns.
However I think that in a few years things will get sorted out and stabilize with the result being less movement by players or perhaps a seemingly more organized use of that concept. There's too much money to be made for things to not settle down and get better.

NorthHawk wrote:I was under the impression that traditional rivalries will continue with the new alignments. There will still be intense emotional rivalries and hate even between teams no longer in the same conferences.
If I read that correctly, it's a smart move to make those exceptions. Oregon State knocking off Oregon for example could have even more impact if Oregon was in the mix for a National Championship just like it always has. The difference will be divisional bragging rights.

They are maintaining the intrastate matchups, but that's it. The previous PAC 12 teams no longer play each other every year. The SEC doesn't have divisions anymore. I don't see that as a good thing that long standing matchups, even ones that aren't in-state rivalries, have ended.

NorthHawk wrote:I have no problem with players getting paid. The pendulum was pulled too far to the side of the NCAA for too long but there are some concerns.
However I think that in a few years things will get sorted out and stabilize with the result being less movement by players or perhaps a seemingly more organized use of that concept. There's too much money to be made for things to not settle down and get better.

Nor do I; I just said it's out of hand, and it is. They've got to get that under control.

I find it amusing the highest paid college athlete last I heard isn't even a football player, but a female gymnast named Livvy Dunne.

If that doesn't show the free market works in college sports, then not sure what else does. When you let the market decide, Livvy Dunne comes out on top.

Have you seen Livvy?

c_hawkbob wrote:Have you seen Livvy?

Yes. LSU just won the College National Championship. She did great.

Not likely why she gets paid so much, but she is a good gymnast too.

The market loves what it loves...haha. It goes to show what men watching college sports really want to see I imagine. She made me watch LSU gymnastics, something I cared nothing about prior.

Though I do like watching Simone Biles do gymnastics. Biles is fricking amazing.

NorthHawk wrote:I was under the impression that traditional rivalries will continue with the new alignments. There will still be intense emotional rivalries and hate even between teams no longer in the same conferences.
If I read that correctly, it's a smart move to make those exceptions. Oregon State knocking off Oregon for example could have even more impact if Oregon was in the mix for a National Championship just like it always has. The difference will be divisional bragging rights.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:They are maintaining the intrastate matchups, but that's it. The previous PAC 12 teams no longer play each other every year. The SEC doesn't have divisions anymore. I don't see that as a good thing that long standing matchups, even ones that aren't in-state rivalries, have ended.

NorthHawk wrote:I have no problem with players getting paid. The pendulum was pulled too far to the side of the NCAA for too long but there are some concerns.
However I think that in a few years things will get sorted out and stabilize with the result being less movement by players or perhaps a seemingly more organized use of that concept. There's too much money to be made for things to not settle down and get better.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:Nor do I; I just said it's out of hand, and it is. They've got to get that under control.

UW will still play WSU as the two schools signed a short-term agreement, but they'll no longer play on Thanksgiving weekend, which has been a tradition within this state for as long as I can remember. It will never be the same.

Although WSU is a better fit athletically and academically for the Mountain West or Western Athletic conference, no longer playing in a Power 5 conference is going to have a profound effect on private donations and fund raising. WSU was already heavily subsidized by the state, and my fear is that them having to depend more on limited state funds might take with it as a casualty my alma mater, Eastern Washington University. Their sister institutions, Western and Central Washington, had to give up football long ago due to budgeting concerns, and Eastern has been hanging on by its fingernails for years.

The problem for the schools who bolted is going to be the time zone change. Stanford and North Carolina, in a lot of previous seasons, has the potential to be great basketball rivalry, but with weekday games tipping off at 7:30pm ET, the game won't come on until 4:30pm out here, before school kids get home from their own basketball practices. It's also going to result in a big increase in travel expenses. If they're going to have to travel to the east coast, Stanford and Cal would have been better fits for the Ivy League, at least academically and would have helped to elevate their prestige.

I was already luke warm on CFB compared to my younger days, so this is likely going to be the straw that broke the camel's back.

The Big10 now has 18 teams so maybe down the road they will split them into 2 conferences like Big10 East and Big10 West to have or keep rivalries alive.
But big changes are almost always followed by smaller changes to make things better as the changes settle in and opportunities or shortcomings are identified.
I would expect that in 5 years we will look back and see a lot of changes from today - some big and some small.

NorthHawk wrote:The Big10 now has 18 teams so maybe down the road they will split them into 2 conferences like Big10 East and Big10 West to have or keep rivalries alive.
But big changes are almost always followed by smaller changes to make things better as the changes settle in and opportunities or shortcomings are identified.
I would expect that in 5 years we will look back and see a lot of changes from today - some big and some small.

I don't see it getting any better, at least not in my lifetime.

Sports in general and football in particular are in decline. Multiple surveys have shown that Gen Z adults are less likely to identify themselves as sports fans and participation in football has been declining for years. I don't think you'll see the huge contracts that the colleges have been getting with network stations. I don't think you're going to see the huge contracts that the Big 10 got that caused USC and UCLA to bolt, which is what pushed over the first domino that resulted in the destruction of the Pac-12.

Colleges have a large fan base because of the Alumni who spend a lot of money supporting their teams by either TV/streaming/other ways and direct donations.
I don't think that will change much in the next 20 years which is probably greater than my life time but I think there's a possibility of some newer rivalries and as well the local fans will see more of teams they didn't used to see except in Bowl games.
I'm looking forward to some of the matchups to see how the players do against other opposition than what we've seen in the past. I think overall it's going to be a better value for evaluating talent coming out of the College ranks.

NorthHawk wrote:Colleges have a large fan base because of the Alumni who spend a lot of money supporting their teams by either TV/streaming/other ways and direct donations.
I don't think that will change much in the next 20 years which is probably greater than my life time but I think there's a possibility of some newer rivalries and as well the local fans will see more of teams they didn't used to see except in Bowl games.
I'm looking forward to some of the matchups to see how the players do against other opposition than what we've seen in the past. I think overall it's going to be a better value for evaluating talent coming out of the College ranks.

I'm not nearly as optimistic as you are. This decision on the NFL's Sunday Ticket lawsuit could have ramifications to college football, create another rich-getting-richer scenario and compromise the small schools like Kansas State, Northwestern, Rutgers, Wake Forest, et al, even further. We could end up with one super conference with 24 teams.

The smaller schools will probably take a hit, but I hope in time things will settle down and those schools can rebuild their sports programs.