In basketball, we recalibrated efficiency based on schedule strength to rank every prospect. In football, this approach isn’t as effective because a quarterback’s success largely hinges on factors like the offensive line providing ample time and the receivers making catches. Coaching plays a more significant role in football, as plays are specifically designed for quarterbacks, who are often micromanaged within structured systems with limited room to veer out of. This stands in contrast to basketball, where the game flows more freely, players engage on both offense and defense and exert more individual control over their performances. However, while this method does offer some value, it overlooks the rushing component in football, but passing is still the most important skill in any successful modern offense. Here are our current QB rankings adjusted for SOS.
| Quarterback | QB Rating | ADJeff | From | To | |
| 1 | Kyle McCord | 161.6 | 37.84 | Ohio State | Syracuse |
| 2 | Dillon Gabriel | 172 | 32.17 | Oklahoma | Oregon |
| 3 | Will Rogers | 138 | 28.04 | Mississippi State | Washington |
| 4 | Will Howard | 140.1 | 26.90 | Kansas State | – |
| 5 | Max Johnson | 136.7 | 26.60 | Texas A&M | UNC |
| 6 | DJ Uiagalelei | 145 | 23.92 | Clemson | – |
| 7 | Tyler Van Dyke | 146.6 | 22.69 | Miami | Wisconsin |
| 8 | KJ Jefferson | 153.4 | 21.02 | Arkansas | – |
| 9 | Tyler Shough | 130.4 | 20.86 | Texas Tech | Louisville |
| 10 | Cam Ward | 145.4 | 19.34 | Washington State | Miami |
| 11 | Blake Shapen | 135.8 | 15.88 | Baylor | Miss State |
| 12 | Dante Moore | 125.6 | 15.59 | UCLA | Oregon |
| 13 | Brendan Sorsby | 129.9 | 14.84 | Indiana | Cincy |
| 14 | AJ Swann | 130.1 | 14.04 | Vanderbilt | LSU |
| 15 | Ken Seals | 130.0 | 14.04 | Vanderbilt | |
| 16 | Grayson McCall | 178.4 | 13.74 | Coastal Carolina | – |
| 17 | Katin Houser | 113.5 | 13.50 | Michigan State | ECU |
| 18 | Riley Leonard | 141.1 | 13.10 | Duke | Notre Dame |
| 19 | Brayden Schager | 130.9 | 12.05 | Boise State | Arkansas |
| 20 | Jordan McCloud | 165.9 | 10.12 | JMU | – |
Related
College Basketball
2026-27 Preseason College Basketball Projections: AdjEff Model
College Basketball
2026-27 Preseason College Basketball Player Ratings: AdjEff Model
College Basketball
Refining the Lens: The 2026 International-to-NCAA Translation Model
College Basketball
Transfer Portal Basketball Rankings 2026
College Basketball
Transfer Portal Basketball Rankings 2026
College Basketball
2026-27 Preseason College Basketball Projections: AdjEff Model
College Basketball
2026-27 Preseason College Basketball Player Ratings: AdjEff Model
College Basketball
Summer Clearance: Bargain Bin Shopping in the Portal
College Basketball
The Top 300 Returning Players
