2026 NFL Draft: Final What We're Hearing Notes
What We’re Hearing: Inside the league as the 2026 NFL Draft comes into focus
There’s a different tone around this year’s draft cycle.
Spend enough time talking to evaluators, and the usual pre-draft language—“deep class,” “good value into Day 2,” “quarterback-driven at the top”—starts to fall away. In its place is something more cautious, more nuanced. One longtime AFC executive summed it up this way earlier this week: “This isn’t a conviction draft. It’s a projection draft.”
That distinction is shaping everything.
At the very top, the expectation around the league is that Indiana quarterback Fernando Mendoza will ultimately hear his name called first. But the why matters. Teams aren’t unanimously sold on him as a franchise-altering talent; they’re sold on the reality that quarterback scarcity forces decisions. Several clubs picking in the top five have comparable grades on Mendoza—solid starter traits, functional athleticism, clean processing—but not the kind of separation typically associated with a wire-to-wire No. 1 overall player.
And that’s where things get interesting.
Multiple front offices have quietly acknowledged that the 2027 quarterback class is already viewed internally as stronger. That reality has influenced how aggressive teams are willing to be in trade discussions. There’s less desperation than you’d expect at the top of a QB-needy draft order, and more willingness to let the board come to them rather than force a move.
If the quarterback class lacks clarity, the defensive front seven offers the opposite.
Across the league, this is viewed as the backbone of the draft. One NFC scouting director described it as “the safest place to live in this class,” pointing to a cluster of edge defenders and hybrid linebackers who fit the modern game. Texas Tech’s David Bailey continues to generate top-10 certainty in most buildings, valued for his combination of length, power, and scheme versatility. He may not have the highest ceiling in the group, but he’s widely considered one of the lowest-risk projections.
Behind him, the conversation shifts from safe to explosive. Auburn’s Keldric Faulk is a name that keeps coming up in those discussions. His tape is uneven, but the traits are undeniable—and for teams drafting on upside, that’s enough. It only takes one front office to bet on the ceiling, and there’s a growing belief that Faulk won’t last as long as some public boards suggest.
Then there’s Ohio State’s Arvell Reese, who has picked up momentum late in the process. Teams running hybrid fronts are especially intrigued by his ability to rush, drop, and move around the formation. He’s not a finished product, but in a class defined by projection, that’s hardly disqualifying.
What’s notable is how consistently teams return to the same conclusion: if you’re picking early and want certainty, you’re probably drafting defense.
That philosophy extends beyond the Power Five.
Small-school evaluations are playing a larger role this year than they typically do at the top 100 level. Southeastern Louisiana defensive tackle Kaleb Proctor is one of the clearest examples. Early in the fall, he was viewed as a developmental prospect with intriguing flashes. Now, after testing well and holding his own against higher-level competition, he’s firmly in the Day 2 conversation for several teams. The shift reflects a broader trend—production and explosiveness are carrying more weight than helmet scouting in certain rooms.
Offensively, the most fascinating development might be happening at running back.
Notre Dame’s Jeremiyah Love has quietly built a case as one of the best pure football players in the class. Not just at his position—period. And while positional value still matters, there are teams picking in the top 10 that have done real work on what it would look like to take him earlier than expected. No one is declaring a full-scale market correction at running back, but the conversation has changed. Love isn’t being evaluated through the traditional lens of the position; he’s being evaluated as an offensive centerpiece.
At wide receiver, the talent is there—but so is volatility.
Arizona State’s Jordyn Tyson embodies that tension. His tape suggests a player who could come off the board in the top 15, with the ability to separate and create after the catch. But medical evaluations have created a wide range of outcomes depending on the team. Some see a WR1. Others have significant hesitation. It’s the kind of profile that only takes one team to resolve, but it also creates real uncertainty about where he ultimately lands.
And then there are the late-process variables. Georgia’s Zachariah Branch had been building steady momentum into the early Day 2 range, but off-field questions emerging close to the draft have forced teams to revisit his evaluation. In a class already light on consensus, those late shifts carry even more weight.
The same lack of consensus shows up at cornerback.
Teams are aligning more tightly than ever to scheme-specific traits, and that’s leading to dramatic differences in how players are stacked. A corner who fits a press-heavy system might be viewed as a first-round talent in one building and a Day 2 player in another. The result is a position group where perceived “slides” on draft night may simply reflect how differently teams are defining value.
League-wide, there’s also a quiet acknowledgment that offensive line value may peak later than usual. Several teams believe starting-caliber tackles will be available into the back half of the first round, which could influence how aggressively they address other needs early.
Put it all together, and the shape of this draft starts to come into focus.
There may be a quarterback at No. 1. There may be a run on defensive playmakers shortly after. But beyond that, the board feels fluid in a way teams are still working to define. One general manager described the middle of the first round as “wide open,” adding that the gap between players ranked 8th and 25th on their board was smaller than in most years.
Or, as another evaluator put it more simply:
“After the first handful of picks, you’re going to see teams draft their board—not the consensus.”
And in this class, those two things might look very different.