Updated October 21, 2026 · Round 1 · By DraftBlaster
DraftBlaster’s 2027 NFL Mock Draft projects all 32 first-round selections, weighing prospect value against each team’s roster and the players still available. This edition starts with Jeremiah Smith as a receiving investment for the Chargers, sends five quarterbacks into Round 1, and gives the Jets three opportunities to reshape their roster. Every pick includes Team Needs, prospect details, a projected role, supporting evidence, a main concern, and an available alternative.
Order: Tankathon, captured October 20, 2026. Existing traded picks are included; no additional trades are projected. This is a fixed order snapshot, not a prediction of final standings. October 21 updates expand the analysis and Team Needs throughout Round 1; the pick sequence is unchanged.
Beyond the obvious: Each selection examines a specific tradeoff—how the player fits, what the team would be passing up, and how the choice works with its other picks. Use the team links below for a particular franchise, or read the full round in order.
Jump to picks 1–8, 9–16, 17–24, or 25–32.
Prospect details use official college listings. Class may describe academic year rather than remaining eligibility; measurements are roster figures, not combine results. Team Needs are DraftBlaster’s editorial priorities, not official team rankings, and are reassessed for each edition.
Find your team: 1. Los Angeles Chargers · 2. Miami Dolphins · 3. Tennessee Titans · 4. Tampa Bay Buccaneers · 5. Washington Commanders · 6. New York Jets (via Dallas) · 7. Philadelphia Eagles · 8. Houston Texans · 9. New York Jets (via Indianapolis) · 10. Arizona Cardinals · 11. Cleveland Browns (via Los Angeles Rams) · 12. New Orleans Saints · 13. New York Jets · 14. Atlanta Falcons · 15. Las Vegas Raiders · 16. Seattle Seahawks · 17. Cincinnati Bengals · 18. Baltimore Ravens · 19. New York Giants · 20. Carolina Panthers · 21. Detroit Lions · 22. Pittsburgh Steelers · 23. Denver Broncos · 24. New England Patriots · 25. Jacksonville Jaguars · 26. Cleveland Browns · 27. Dallas Cowboys (via Green Bay) · 28. Chicago Bears · 29. Buffalo Bills · 30. Minnesota Vikings · 31. Kansas City Chiefs · 32. San Francisco 49ers
Round 1: Picks 1–8
1.
Los Angeles Chargers — Jeremiah Smith
WR · Ohio State · Junior · 6′4″ · 222 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive line · Wide receiver · Cornerback
Los Angeles has Ladd McConkey and Quentin Johnston atop its latest receiver depth chart, but their presence does not close the position to a premium investment. Smith gives this projection a clear purpose: add a receiver around whom Herbert’s passing game can be built, rather than use the first pick merely to fill the emptiest position on the roster.
The production supports that level of consideration. Ohio State credits Smith with consecutive seasons above 1,200 receiving yards, followed by eight catches for 164 yards at Texas this September. That combines sustained output with a substantial performance away from home. We project Smith as a featured perimeter target alongside McConkey; earning that role against NFL coverage remains the next test.
Beyond the obvious: Offensive-line investment remains a serious competing use of this pick. Selecting Smith means judging his receiving value to be greater than the improvement available up front—not pretending protection is already solved.
Main concern: The opportunity cost of passing on a top tackle. A receiver cannot solve breakdowns that prevent the ball from reaching him.
Also considered: Jordan Seaton, OT, LSU—a direct alternative if protecting Herbert outweighs adding his next featured target.
Sources: Chargers depth chart, October 20 · Ohio State biography and game log
2.
Miami Dolphins — Dante Moore
QB · Oregon · Redshirt Junior* · 6′3″ · 220 lbs
Team Needs: Quarterback · Cornerback · Wide receiver
Miami signed Malik Willis this offseason and currently lists him ahead of Kyle McCord and Brady Cook. That provides a starting point for the position, not an automatic reason to pass on a quarterback at No. 2. This projection assumes Miami finishes the evaluation without a settled long-term answer and uses its early selection to pursue one.
Moore retains the place he held in our opening edition, supported by a college résumé that includes third-team All-Big Ten recognition from the media in 2025. His immediate availability, however, limits the case for fresh enthusiasm: Oregon’s October 18 report says he missed a second consecutive game after a concussion. We are preserving the projection while awaiting further evidence, rather than treating an absence as a new performance.
Beyond the obvious: Quarterback is a conditional need. If Willis establishes himself, this selection should change; the roster should drive the mock rather than an assumption that every struggling team must replace its passer.
Main concern: An interrupted evaluation. His return and subsequent play matter more than moving him up or down on an idle week.
Also considered: Darian Mensah, QB, Miami—the competing quarterback choice if Miami still prioritizes the position. This sample retains Moore pending a fuller comparative evaluation.
Sources: Dolphins depth chart · Willis signing · Oregon biography · Oregon availability report, October 18. *Oregon’s biography uses redshirt junior; its roster header and our previous edition used senior. Academic class and playing eligibility can differ.
3.
Tennessee Titans — Jordan Seaton
OT · LSU · Junior · 6′5″ · 311 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive line · Edge rusher · Cornerback
Tennessee’s depth chart lists Dan Moore Jr. at left tackle, JC Latham at right tackle, and Cam Ward at quarterback. Seaton therefore represents a deliberate succession and competition plan at left tackle, not a claim that the Titans have nobody playing there. Our projection commits another premium resource to the environment around Ward.
His strongest documented selling point is experience in the proposed role. LSU lists 22 starts and 1,421 snaps at left tackle across his two Colorado seasons. Its biography credits him with allowing one sack in nine starts in 2025, while also recording that he missed the final three games through injury. The protection record is encouraging, but its college context and the missed time belong in the same assessment.
Beyond the obvious: Seaton should have a clear tackle role. Drafting him third and assuming a move inside would weaken the reason for valuing his established left-tackle experience so highly.
Main concern: Whether his current LSU play sustains the earlier protection record against a different set of opponents. The 2025 injury also requires follow-up before a final grade.
Also considered: Colin Simmons, EDGE, Texas—an alternative if Tennessee values another pressure threat above a tackle succession plan.
Sources: Titans depth chart, dated October 12 · LSU biography and roster measurements
4.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers — Darian Mensah
QB · Miami · Redshirt Junior · 6′3″ · 205 lbs
Team Needs: Edge rusher · Wide receiver · Quarterback succession
Tampa Bay still lists Baker Mayfield as its starter, so Mensah is a succession projection rather than an emergency replacement. Spending the fourth pick on a quarterback would require the organization to see a longer-term ceiling worth passing on immediate defensive help. That is the assumption behind this selection, and it is one of the more debatable decisions in this round.
Mensah brings evidence from his new setting: Miami named him ACC Quarterback of the Week following its September road win at Wake Forest. That supports his ability to produce after another program change, but the award does not settle the NFL evaluation. The proposed fit is a developmental starter whose arrival gives Tampa Bay options beyond its present quarterback arrangement.
Beyond the obvious: Quarterback does not have to be the roster’s largest immediate vacancy to be the choice. It does have to offer enough long-term value to justify postponing help elsewhere.
Main concern: This pick depends on a succession decision Tampa Bay has not announced. If Mayfield remains the clear long-term answer, an edge defender is the stronger allocation.
Also considered: Colin Simmons, EDGE, Texas—an immediate investment in pressure rather than quarterback succession.
Sources: Buccaneers depth chart · Miami’s September 21 award report
5.
Washington Commanders — Colin Simmons
EDGE · Texas · Junior · 6′3″ · 246 lbs
Team Needs: Cornerback · Edge rusher · Interior defensive line
Washington chooses pressure over coverage with Simmons still available. The projected role is an edge threat who can force protections to account for him, giving the defense a way to affect passing downs without always sending an extra defender. This is a premium-position selection, not a suggestion that the secondary can wait indefinitely.
Texas documented a school-record 5.5 sacks against Tennessee in September, building on a freshman season with nine sacks. The attraction is the combination of an established early impact and a recent high-end performance. Washington should value the repeatable wins behind those totals, rather than expect an extraordinary single-game sack count to become a weekly baseline.
Beyond the obvious: A dominant edge prospect can help coverage indirectly, but he cannot cover for it on every snap. Cornerback remains part of the wider draft plan.
Main concern: Concentration of production: a record outing can distort the impression of an otherwise uneven stretch. The full snap sample matters.
Also considered: Leonard Moore, CB, Notre Dame—address coverage directly if the grades are close.
Sources: Texas’ September 29 Simmons report · Texas biography
6.
New York Jets (via Dallas) — Drew Mestemaker
QB · Oklahoma State · Redshirt Sophomore · 6′3″ · 215 lbs
Team Needs: Quarterback · Cornerback · Wide receiver
The Jets’ official depth chart puts Geno Smith ahead of Cade Klubnik. Mestemaker would therefore enter a room with an established veteran and a younger option; he is a projection of the next starter, not the only quarterback available to play. With three first-round picks in this edition, New York can invest at the position without using its entire opening-round budget.
Oklahoma State’s current statistics list 1,940 passing yards, 16 touchdowns and six interceptions through six appearances. Those figures provide a productive starting point after his transfer from North Texas. Our proposed role is a quarterback developed for the full offense, with particular attention to whether his decisions remain sound when timing and protection deteriorate.
Beyond the obvious: Owning several selections makes the supporting plan important. The later cornerbacks improve the defense, but leave New York needing another route to help the new passer.
Main concern: College volume and efficiency do not establish how quickly he will solve NFL coverage. Six games in the current setting are still a limited sample.
Also considered: CJ Carr, QB, Notre Dame—a different developmental quarterback case, available in this scenario.
Sources: Jets depth chart · Oklahoma State 2026 statistics
7.
Philadelphia Eagles — Trevor Goosby
OT · Texas · Senior · 6′7″ · 325 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive tackle · Interior offensive line · Cornerback
Philadelphia’s depth chart lists Jordan Mailata on the left and Markel Bell on the right. Goosby is a tackle investment with a defined question: does he improve the right-side competition, provide the next long-term starter, or both? The pick should not depend on moving an established left tackle simply to accommodate a rookie.
Texas’ biography records recognition as the Outland Trophy’s national player of the week following its September Ohio State game. That is useful evidence from a major assignment, though an award is not a complete blocking grade. In this projection, Philadelphia values a prospect already carrying substantial tackle responsibility over a more speculative position conversion.
Beyond the obvious: The distinction between left and right tackle belongs in the plan. Drafting an offensive tackle does not automatically explain which incumbent loses snaps.
Main concern: How readily his college work transfers to the side Philadelphia needs most. Technique and comfort must support any proposed switch.
Also considered: Leonard Moore, CB, Notre Dame—use the early pick on coverage if the tackle fit is less convincing.
Sources: Eagles depth chart · Texas biography
8.
Houston Texans — Will Echoles
DL · Ole Miss · Junior · 6′3″ · 315 lbs
Team Needs: Interior offensive line · Defensive tackle · Wide receiver
Houston takes the first interior defender in this projection, choosing a player whose value must include more than obvious passing situations. The proposed role for Echoles is a rotation piece who develops into a regular interior starter, allowing the front to stay competitive against the run without surrendering every chance to penetrate.
Ole Miss lists Echoles at 6-foot-3 and 315 pounds and identifies him as a preseason second-team All-America selection. The frame fits an interior assignment, but the honors and measurements are starting evidence rather than a reason to assume he already wins every type of block. At No. 8, the case needs both disruption and dependable early-down work.
Beyond the obvious: This is a choice to improve the defense while leaving offensive-line investment for another opportunity. That opportunity cost should remain visible.
Main concern: Top-ten value requires a passing-down contribution. A useful run defender alone would make this an expensive allocation.
Also considered: Cam Coleman, WR, Texas—another way to use the pick if offensive help carries the stronger grade.
Sources: Ole Miss biography and roster
Picks 9–16
9.New York Jets (via Indianapolis) — Leonard Moore
CB · Notre Dame · Junior · 6′2″ · 197 lbs
Team Needs: Quarterback · Cornerback · Wide receiver
After taking Mestemaker, the Jets turn to a different premium position. Moore is projected as a perimeter corner who can earn a substantial defensive role rather than simply add depth. The sequence spreads the investment across offense and defense while preserving the final first-round pick for another decision.
Notre Dame’s 2025 season statistics credit Moore with five interceptions; his biography also records a two-interception performance against Boise State that season. That establishes ball production across more than one isolated play. The Jets’ projection still needs coverage consistency to be the foundation: interceptions are valuable, but they do not describe every target or every assignment.
Beyond the obvious: His selection raises the bar for taking another corner at No. 13. That later pick must add a complementary role or a clearly superior value.
Main concern: Turnover totals can overstate coverage quality. The evaluation must include the completions allowed between the highlights.
Also considered: Cam Coleman, WR, Texas—pair the new quarterback with an early receiving investment instead.
Sources: Notre Dame biography · Notre Dame 2025 statistics
10.
Arizona Cardinals — Cam Coleman
WR · Texas · Junior · 6′3″ · 204 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive tackle · Wide receiver · Edge rusher
Arizona’s depth chart has Trey McBride at tight end and Michael Wilson among its starting receivers. Coleman adds a proposed perimeter target to that structure, giving the offense another receiving investment without assuming that every existing pass catcher must be replaced. The opportunity is to create a stronger set of options across the field.
Texas’ biography credits Coleman with 56 catches, 708 yards and five touchdowns at Auburn in 2025 before his transfer. That is a full-season receiving record rather than a projection drawn only from size. At 6-foot-3, he offers a clear physical profile for an outside assignment, though his route-to-route separation must justify the proposed role.
Beyond the obvious: A receiving addition helps most when his work complements McBride’s, rather than simply adding another target in the same areas.
Main concern: College production does not establish a complete NFL route tree. Winning against tighter coverage is central to the first-round case.
Also considered: Dylan Stewart, EDGE, South Carolina—use the selection on defensive pressure instead of another offensive piece.
Sources: Cardinals depth chart · Texas biography
11.
Cleveland Browns (via Los Angeles Rams) — Charlie Becker
WR · Indiana · Junior (third year) · 6′4″ · 208 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive line · Wide receiver · Defensive line
Cleveland uses the Rams-derived selection on a receiver and reserves its own later pick for protection. Becker’s proposed role is an outside target who expands the offense’s options on intermediate and downfield throws. The two-pick plan matters: adding a receiver without improving the conditions for getting him the ball would leave the investment incomplete.
Indiana’s official account of its November 2025 Wisconsin win credits Becker with five catches for 108 yards and a touchdown. That offers a concrete example of his production against a conference opponent. The first-round argument now rests on showing that those useful stretches represent a sustainable receiving role rather than a handful of peak games.
Beyond the obvious: The receiver and guard selections should be assessed together. The goal is a more functional passing offense, not two unrelated additions.
Main concern: How consistently he can create available throws when the defense prioritizes him. A strong isolated game is supporting evidence, not the whole grade.
Also considered: Trevor Lauck, OT, Iowa—take a tackle now if the protection grade is stronger and pursue receiving help later.
Sources: Indiana’s Wisconsin game report · Indiana biography
12.
New Orleans Saints — CJ Carr
QB · Notre Dame · Junior · 6′2″ · 215 lbs
Team Needs: Quarterback · Offensive line · Cornerback
New Orleans becomes the fourth quarterback destination in this round. The proposed role for Carr is a future starter developed within a coherent passing system, not an assumption that a first-round label makes him ready for every NFL situation immediately. Taking him here also means passing on defensive prospects who may offer earlier returns.
Notre Dame documented Carr’s 342-yard, two-touchdown outing against NC State in October 2025. It provides evidence of an offense functioning through his passing, while leaving the harder questions about pressure and changing pictures after the snap open. This projection values the developmental opportunity at No. 12, with readiness determined by the quality of his decisions rather than the school on his jersey.
Beyond the obvious: The quarterback investment needs a protection and development plan. The selection alone does not supply either.
Main concern: How his decision-making holds up when the first option disappears. A productive college box score cannot answer that by itself.
Also considered: Dylan Stewart, EDGE, South Carolina—a defensive investment if New Orleans does not see a first-round quarterback grade.
Sources: Notre Dame’s Carr feature and game notes
13.New York Jets — Ellis Robinson IV
CB · Georgia · Junior · 6′0″ · 180 lbs
Team Needs: Quarterback · Cornerback · Wide receiver
The Jets take a second corner after choosing Leonard Moore four picks earlier. This is the round’s clearest concentration of resources: New York would be betting that two young coverage additions create more value than distributing all three first-rounders across different position groups. Robinson is projected into perimeter competition, with inside work an option only if the evaluation supports it.
Georgia lists Robinson at 6 feet and 180 pounds and records preseason first-team All-SEC recognition from both the media and coaches. That gives this selection a substantial college pedigree, but it should not become an automatic declaration that he and Moore form a finished NFL pairing. Their responsibilities, development time and individual limitations still matter.
Beyond the obvious: The justification is two strong coverage grades, not a need to invent a slot role for one of them. If their best roles overlap too much, change this pick.
Main concern: Opportunity cost: two corners leave the newly drafted quarterback without an accompanying first-round weapon or blocker.
Also considered: Ryan Coleman-Williams, WR, Alabama—give Mestemaker another receiving option and diversify the three-pick plan.
Sources: Georgia biography
14.
Atlanta Falcons — Dylan Stewart
EDGE · South Carolina · Junior · 6′5″ · 250 lbs
Team Needs: Edge rusher · Cornerback · Interior defensive line
Atlanta uses the middle of the round on Stewart, projecting a defender who can grow into a regular edge role rather than be limited to a handful of obvious pass-rush snaps. The attraction is improving the front’s ability to create disruption without making every pressure call dependent on extra rushers.
South Carolina’s biography records 12 tackles for loss, 4.5 sacks and three forced fumbles in 2025, when Stewart started all 11 games he played. Those figures show disruption beyond sacks, while the missed game also belongs in the availability review. Atlanta’s case is for a complete edge investment with passing-down upside, not a promise that the college totals will automatically multiply.
Beyond the obvious: A sack total misses some useful work, but it should not be replaced with vague claims about pressure. Separate individual wins from scheme-created opportunities.
Main concern: Consistency against the run and across a full workload must support the proposed every-down role.
Also considered: Ashton Hampton, CB, Clemson—address coverage if that prospect’s grade and fit are stronger.
Sources: South Carolina biography
15.
Las Vegas Raiders — Ashton Hampton
CB · Clemson · Junior · 6′2″ · 205 lbs
Team Needs: Cornerback · Offensive line · Wide receiver
Las Vegas chooses a corner with the physical profile to compete for outside work. Clemson lists Hampton at 6-foot-2 and 205 pounds, giving this projection a different starting point from a smaller defender drafted primarily for inside assignments. The Raiders’ plan should specify which routes and receiver types he would be asked to handle.
Clemson’s biography documents Hampton’s background on both sides of the ball in high school, including extensive receiving experience. That is useful context for his familiarity with tracking passes, but it is not proof of NFL coverage instincts. The selection rests on developing a dependable perimeter defender, with ball skills adding value after the coverage itself is sound.
Beyond the obvious: Length and receiving history can be useful together, but neither excuses giving away easy separation underneath.
Main concern: Transitions against quick route breaks. His size should be evaluated alongside movement, not treated as a substitute for it.
Also considered: Trevor Lauck, OT, Iowa—invest in the offensive line if the corner evaluation remains too dependent on projection.
Sources: Clemson biography
16.
Seattle Seahawks — Ryan Coleman-Williams
WR · Alabama · Junior · 6′0″ · 184 lbs
Team Needs: Interior offensive line · Wide receiver · Cornerback
Seattle adds Coleman-Williams as a receiving investment with a proposed role in creating explosive opportunities. The goal is not simply to accumulate familiar names: a first-round receiver needs a route and personnel plan that earns him targets within the existing offense. This selection prioritizes that upside over an immediate interior-line addition.
Alabama identifies him as a permanent captain for 2026 and lists him at 6 feet and 184 pounds. The leadership designation adds context to a prospect already carrying significant offensive responsibility. His build also makes the evaluation of releases and contact important; Seattle would be drafting a receiver for the ways he can get available, not for a size advantage on every matchup.
Beyond the obvious: Usage can protect or expose a receiver. Movement before the snap and alignment options are useful only if they help create repeatable opportunities.
Main concern: Handling physical coverage while keeping routes on schedule, particularly when the defense can disrupt the release.
Also considered: Greg Johnson, IOL, Minnesota—address the structure of the offense before adding another target.
Sources: Alabama biography
Picks 17–24
17.
Cincinnati Bengals — David Stone
DL · Oklahoma · Junior · 6′3″ · 315 lbs
Team Needs: Defensive tackle · Edge rusher · Interior offensive line
Cincinnati puts the investment into the middle of its defense. Stone is projected as an interior rotation player with a path to starting work, giving the front another option against runs between the tackles while preserving some capacity to disrupt passing plays. That is a different roster-building choice from adding another specialist outside.
Oklahoma records 42 tackles, eight tackles for loss and 1.5 sacks for Stone in 2025, with two starts across 13 appearances. The run-disruption numbers are useful evidence; the limited starts and modest sack total also argue against presenting him as a finished three-down force. Cincinnati would be buying development as well as the work already demonstrated.
Beyond the obvious: The distinction between a good interior contributor and a first-round difference-maker is often what he adds on passing downs.
Main concern: Whether his pass-rush contribution grows enough to justify this slot. Early-down reliability alone would narrow the return.
Also considered: Yhonzae Pierre, EDGE, Alabama—prioritize an outside pressure role instead.
Sources: Oklahoma biography and career statistics
18.
Baltimore Ravens — Trevor Lauck
OT · Iowa · Junior (fourth year) · 6′5″ · 314 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive tackle · Interior offensive line · Edge rusher
Baltimore opts for a tackle with a documented season in the role rather than assuming that a large college lineman can play anywhere. Lauck’s proposed value is competition and eventual starting work on the edge of the offensive line. The first decision should be his best side, followed by how that fits the Ravens’ personnel plan.
Iowa reports that Lauck started all 13 games at left tackle in 2025 and earned third-team All-Big Ten recognition from the coaches. That is a meaningful workload in a line that won the Joe Moore Award. The team honor helps describe his environment, while the individual evaluation must still separate his own execution from the collective result.
Beyond the obvious: A strong line can make its members look more settled than they are in isolation. Identify the assignments he wins without help.
Main concern: Adjusting to varied NFL rush approaches and any move away from his established college side.
Also considered: Yhonzae Pierre, EDGE, Alabama—invest in defensive pressure if the remaining tackle grade is less convincing.
Sources: Iowa biography
19.
New York Giants — Nick Marsh
WR · Indiana · Junior (third year) · 6′3″ · 210 lbs
Team Needs: Wide receiver · Offensive line · Cornerback
The Giants use this pick on an outside receiving option. At Indiana’s listed 6-foot-3 and 210 pounds, Marsh offers a substantial frame, but the proposed role is more specific than simply giving the quarterback a big target: he must provide throws that remain available when coverage closes quickly.
Indiana’s biography records his move after two seasons at Michigan State. That change of setting makes his 2026 work especially useful for comparison: does the receiving value travel with him, and what changes when the offense asks for different routes? In this projection, New York values the chance to add a regular perimeter contributor rather than a receiver dependent on a narrow package.
Beyond the obvious: A transfer can reveal which parts of a prospect’s production are portable. Compare responsibilities as well as totals across the two offenses.
Main concern: Winning consistently enough to avoid becoming a target used mainly when the matchup is favorable.
Also considered: Greg Johnson, IOL, Minnesota—improve protection if that creates more reliable offensive value.
Sources: Indiana biography and roster
20.
Carolina Panthers — Kelley Jones
CB · Mississippi State · Senior · 6′4″ · 205 lbs
Team Needs: Cornerback · Edge rusher · Safety
Carolina chooses a perimeter corner with an uncommon size profile. Mississippi State lists Jones at 6-foot-4 and 205 pounds; the proposed role is outside coverage, where that length can be relevant at the catch point. It is not a reason to assume he can ignore leverage or give receivers free access into their routes.
His school biography records 32 career appearances and 22 starts entering this stage of his career, along with 12 pass breakups and two interceptions through 2025. That experience gives the projection more substance than measurements alone. Carolina would be selecting a defender with meaningful college exposure, while still needing confidence in how he moves against NFL route speed.
Beyond the obvious: A tall corner should be tested against smaller, quicker receivers as carefully as against big downfield targets.
Main concern: Change of direction and recovery when the receiver wins early. Length only helps if he remains in position to use it.
Also considered: KJ Bolden, S, Georgia—improve the back end through a different coverage role.
Sources: Mississippi State biography
21.
Detroit Lions — Yhonzae Pierre
EDGE · Alabama · Senior · 6′4″ · 251 lbs
Team Needs: Edge rusher · Cornerback · Interior offensive line
Detroit adds Pierre as an edge investment, with an initial role built around contributing to the pressure rotation and earning more snaps through complete defensive play. The selection should be judged by the improvement he offers the front, rather than by the idea that a team selecting late has only luxury needs.
Alabama’s current biography credits Pierre with 2.5 sacks and a team-leading seven quarterback hurries across his first six starts of 2026. The hurries help broaden the picture beyond sacks, although school charting is not a standardized league-wide comparison. Detroit’s projection values a defender producing in a larger role after returning for another college season.
Beyond the obvious: Pressure that forces an early throw can help without a sack. It still needs to be distinguished from a free run created by the defensive call.
Main concern: Run defense and a reliable counter when the initial rush does not win. A narrow specialist role would reduce his value here.
Also considered: KJ Bolden, S, Georgia—spend the pick on coverage versatility instead.
Sources: Alabama biography
22.
Pittsburgh Steelers — Trinidad Chambliss
QB · Ole Miss · Fifth-year+ · 6′0″ · 210 lbs
Team Needs: Quarterback · Offensive line · Cornerback
Pittsburgh takes the fifth quarterback in this edition, projecting Chambliss as a candidate to become the long-term starter. The appeal at No. 22 is the opportunity to address the position without needing a hypothetical trade into the top ten. That opportunity is only valuable if the quarterback grade justifies it; the position’s importance cannot make every available passer a first-rounder.
Ole Miss’ 2025 statistics record 3,937 passing yards, 22 touchdowns and three interceptions. That is a substantial FBS season after his earlier Division II career. His listed 6-foot frame and extended college path make the translation questions different from those of a younger, larger prospect, but neither should replace assessment of the actual decisions and throws.
Beyond the obvious: The extra college experience changes the development argument. Pittsburgh needs a case for what he can execute soon, not simply years of imagined improvement.
Main concern: How size and the college passing environment affect the throws available against NFL coverage and pressure.
Also considered: Greg Johnson, IOL, Minnesota—reinforce the offense if the quarterback grade falls below the first-round threshold.
Sources: Ole Miss 2025 statistics · Ole Miss biography
23.
Denver Broncos — Jamari Johnson
TE · Oregon · Senior · 6′5″ · 255 lbs
Team Needs: Tight end · Offensive line · Linebacker
Denver selects a tight end for a role that needs to connect receiving work with the rest of the offense. Johnson is projected as a target who can stay involved across several personnel packages, rather than a player whose entrance always signals a pass. That gives the selection a clearer purpose than adding another large pass catcher.
Oregon credits Johnson with 32 catches for 510 yards and three touchdowns in 2025, when he appeared in all 15 games and started ten. The receiving record and workload provide a useful foundation. The next question is how much of that role Denver could carry into its own blocking and route assignments without simplifying the offense around him.
Beyond the obvious: A tight end creates more flexibility when the defense cannot read the play from his alignment or presence alone.
Main concern: Blocking reliability must support the proposed broad role. Receiving production does not establish that part of the job.
Also considered: Trey’Dez Green, TE, LSU—a different receiving profile at the same position, still available here.
Sources: Oregon biography
24.
New England Patriots — A’Mauri Washington
DL · Oregon · Senior · 6′3″ · 325 lbs
Team Needs: Interior offensive line · Defensive tackle · Edge rusher
New England adds Washington to the interior rather than using this pick on another offensive piece. The proposed role begins with controlling space and maintaining the structure of the front, with passing-down snaps earned through disruption. A first-round defensive tackle should make the defense less dependent on favorable down-and-distance situations.
Oregon lists Washington at 6-foot-3 and 325 pounds, and its November 2025 participation record shows ten starts through ten games. That offers both a substantial interior frame and evidence of regular use. The investment here is in a player projected to handle meaningful work, not an assumption that weight alone guarantees he can absorb every double-team.
Beyond the obvious: Holding the middle can create opportunities for teammates, but that contribution should be identified in assignments rather than inferred from another player’s tackle total.
Main concern: Passing-down value. If he must leave the field whenever the offense spreads out, the first-round return becomes narrower.
Also considered: Greg Johnson, IOL, Minnesota—direct the investment toward protection instead.
Sources: Oregon roster · Oregon November 2025 participation notes
Picks 25–32
25.
Jacksonville Jaguars — Trey’Dez Green
TE · LSU · Junior · 6′7″ · 242 lbs
Team Needs: Tight end · Offensive line · Cornerback
Jacksonville chooses a tight end with a proposed receiving role that can extend beyond a traditional attached alignment. LSU lists Green at 6-foot-7 and 242 pounds and describes experience in the slot and split outside. The attraction is the ability to create a different matchup without treating every passing snap as a separate offensive package.
LSU credits him with 33 catches, 433 yards and seven receiving touchdowns in 2025. The scoring production is a clear part of the case, but a touchdown-heavy profile also invites closer inspection of how he gets open away from the goal line. Jacksonville would be buying an expanded receiving role, with blocking development determining how broadly he can be used.
Beyond the obvious: A large catch radius is most valuable when route detail creates a clean throwing window before the catch becomes contested.
Main concern: Whether blocking and route consistency permit a regular role rather than a small set of red-zone situations.
Also considered: Greg Johnson, IOL, Minnesota—improve protection if a broad tight-end role remains too speculative.
Sources: LSU biography and roster
26.Cleveland Browns — Greg Johnson
IOL · Minnesota · Senior · 6′6″ · 325 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive line · Wide receiver · Defensive line
Cleveland follows Becker with an interior offensive lineman, making its first-round plan an investment in both the target and the time needed to find him. Johnson is projected to compete inside, with the precise position determined by the final roster. That is a more coherent use of the two picks than expecting a receiver alone to transform the passing game.
Minnesota lists Johnson at 6-foot-6 and 325 pounds, and his biography records college starting experience dating to 2023. That background gives the selection a meaningful experience base. The evaluation still needs to identify his best NFL assignment: a broad OL designation does not establish equal readiness at guard and center.
Beyond the obvious: Positional flexibility only adds value when the player can actually execute at the additional position. Name the primary job first.
Main concern: Handling quick interior movement while maintaining leverage. Size and experience are not substitutes for staying balanced through contact.
Also considered: Cayden Green, OT/IOL, Missouri—choose a different route to reinforcing protection if tackle flexibility carries more value.
Sources: Minnesota biography
27.
Dallas Cowboys (via Green Bay) — Chris Cole
LB · Georgia · Junior · 6′3″ · 235 lbs
Team Needs: Linebacker · Cornerback · Defensive line
Dallas uses the Green Bay-derived selection on an off-ball linebacker. Cole’s proposed job is to help the defense handle the space between its front and secondary, including underneath coverage and run fits. At this point in the round, the justification must be a player who stays useful when offenses change personnel, not simply another strong college tackler.
Georgia documented Cole’s growing role alongside Justin Williams after the pair earned Freshman All-SEC recognition. That provides a development history within a demanding defense, while his listed 6-foot-3, 235-pound frame fits an inside assignment. The NFL value depends on processing and movement translating into useful snaps, not on inheriting Georgia’s defensive reputation.
Beyond the obvious: Off-ball linebacker carries an opportunity cost against corners and pass rushers. Coverage contribution is an important part of defending the allocation.
Main concern: Taking on blocks without losing access to the play, while also remaining trustworthy when asked to cover space.
Also considered: KJ Bolden, S, Georgia—a different way to improve the middle and back of the defense.
Sources: Georgia’s September 2025 personnel discussion
28.
Chicago Bears — KJ Bolden
S · Georgia · Junior · 6′0″ · 195 lbs
Team Needs: Edge rusher · Safety · Interior offensive line
Chicago selects a safety for a proposed role that connects deep coverage with work closer to the line. The value of Bolden here is the possibility of changing assignments without advertising every coverage before the snap. That is a projection of his professional use, not a claim that a DB label makes him equally suited to every job.
Georgia lists him at 6 feet and 195 pounds and records preseason first-team All-SEC recognition from both the media and coaches. Those evaluations support his standing entering the season. Chicago’s decision should still rest on the current work: reliable positioning and communication matter as much as the most visible plays around the ball.
Beyond the obvious: Versatility is useful when it expands the coordinator’s choices without creating a weak assignment the offense can repeatedly target.
Main concern: The cost of choosing safety over a pressure player. His coverage impact must justify passing on an available edge prospect.
Also considered: Will Heldt, EDGE, Clemson—affect the passing game from the front rather than the back end.
Sources: Georgia biography
29.
Buffalo Bills — Will Heldt
EDGE · Clemson · Senior · 6′6″ · 260 lbs
Team Needs: Edge rusher · Wide receiver · Cornerback
Buffalo adds Heldt to its edge rotation with the goal of developing a defender who earns snaps outside obvious passing situations. The attraction is sustaining pressure through the game rather than relying on one favorable matchup. A late first-rounder still needs a substantial role; being part of a rotation should describe the entry point, not the limit of the investment.
Clemson’s official spring guide documents his arrival after two seasons at Purdue. That gives the evaluation work from more than one program and conference environment. Buffalo should compare the responsibilities and opposition in each setting, with particular attention to which pressures come from his own wins rather than a path opened by teammates.
Beyond the obvious: A transfer offers another test of portability. A rush skill that works in two settings is more persuasive than a sack total detached from its circumstances.
Main concern: A dependable answer when the first move is stopped, plus enough run reliability to avoid a narrow specialist role.
Also considered: KJ Duff, WR, Rutgers—use the pick on another passing-game option instead.
Sources: Clemson’s official transfer background
30.
Minnesota Vikings — Tae Johnson
S · Notre Dame · Junior · 6′2″ · 200 lbs
Team Needs: Safety · Cornerback · Interior defensive line
Minnesota chooses a safety with evidence of finding the ball, projecting Johnson into competition for a role that blends coverage responsibility with timely playmaking. The plan should begin with where he aligns most effectively; a safety who creates turnovers is not automatically a fit for every deep or underneath assignment.
Notre Dame’s November 2025 award report credited Johnson with four interceptions at that stage of his freshman season. That is useful evidence of early impact. Minnesota should value it alongside the quieter snaps that keep an offense from creating explosives: anticipation is an asset only when aggression does not repeatedly take him away from his responsibility.
Beyond the obvious: The best evaluation includes the throws a safety prevents, not just the passes he intercepts. Positioning can be valuable without producing a box-score event.
Main concern: Balancing anticipation with assignment discipline as NFL quarterbacks manipulate coverage and disguise their intentions.
Also considered: Cayden Green, OT/IOL, Missouri—put the investment into the offensive line if the safety role is not clear enough.
Sources: Notre Dame’s November 2025 award report
31.
Kansas City Chiefs — KJ Duff
WR · Rutgers · Junior · 6′6″ · 225 lbs
Team Needs: Wide receiver · Offensive line · Edge rusher
Kansas City adds Duff as a proposed outside receiving target, with an emphasis on creating useful throwing windows rather than simply winning occasional jump balls. Rutgers lists him at 6-foot-6 and 225 pounds, giving the offense a distinctive physical profile if his route work earns a regular place in the passing plan.
The production is substantial: Rutgers credits him with 60 catches for 1,084 yards and seven touchdowns in 2025. Its October 19 report also records nine receiving scores through six games in 2026. That connects the first-round case to sustained output across seasons, though touchdowns and size still need to be separated from the ability to get available on ordinary downs.
Beyond the obvious: A tall receiver becomes more valuable when he does not need every target to become a contested catch. Separation and timing should make the frame an advantage, not a rescue plan.
Main concern: Releases and route transitions against tighter professional coverage, particularly when defenders disrupt the timing early.
Also considered: Cayden Green, OT/IOL, Missouri—improve the protection structure before adding another target.
Sources: Rutgers biography · Rutgers’ October 19 award report
32.
San Francisco 49ers — Cayden Green
OT/IOL · Missouri · Senior · 6′5″ · 324 lbs
Team Needs: Offensive line · Cornerback · Defensive line
San Francisco closes the round by investing in protection and a possible succession plan along the offensive line. Green’s proposed role should remain flexible until the evaluation establishes his best position, but flexibility is not the entire argument. The pick needs a primary assignment he can perform well enough to justify first-round resources.
Missouri’s biography describes 2026 as his second season starting at left tackle for the Tigers and also records earlier starting work at left guard for Oklahoma. That is genuine experience in different assignments rather than versatility inferred only from measurements. San Francisco would be using that background to widen its options while identifying where his footwork and leverage translate most reliably.
Beyond the obvious: Cross-training can help roster construction, but frequent position changes can also slow a rookie’s development. Establish the first job before adding the second.
Main concern: Whether his best professional position is tackle or guard. The answer changes the value of this selection and the development plan.
Also considered: Kade Pieper, IOL, Iowa—an alternative outside this projected first round if San Francisco prioritizes an interior role.
Sources: Missouri biography
2027 NFL Mock Draft methodology
An October mock is a working forecast. Prospect availability, declarations, injuries, coaching changes, free agency, and the final order can all change the outcome. Positions listed here describe the current prospect pool; they do not settle a player’s eventual professional role. The team-building discussion explains our choices without claiming access to private scouting grades or interviews.
Prospect names, positions, and schools were checked against Tankathon’s current prospect directory. The selection sequence is our own. For the week’s game context, read the DraftBlaster Draft Notebook.
The Tuesday edition
This is the opening edition, so there is no previous DraftBlaster projection to compare. Future updates will explain meaningful movement rather than quietly swapping names. New mock drafts and the Draft Notebook are planned together for Tuesday mornings at 5:00 a.m. Eastern.
Explore the prospect files
Jeremiah Smith: the case for a receiver at No. 1 · Jordan Seaton: the left-tackle record · How to evaluate quarterbacks
Understand the reasoning behind the picks
Our NFL Draft 101 library explains the concepts used throughout this mock. Explore offensive schemes, defensive assignments, zone and gap blocking and big nickel against two tight ends to see why a player’s projected job matters.
The draft trade value guide explains the limits of pick-point comparisons. Our combine guide separates workout evidence from projection, while Mock Draft Bad Habits describes the standards behind a consistent forecast.