Drew Allar: A potential steal in the 2026 NFL Draft

When the Steelers selected Drew Allar in the third round of the 2026 NFL Draft , I didn't love the pick, not even a little bit.

Yes, the physical traits were obvious – they've always been obvious. Yes, he can make every throw, create outside structure and do things physically that most QBs wouldn't even try. The problem was everything that came after that.

During his last two seasons at Penn State, I kept coming back to the same concerns. The footwork got hurried, and pressure often sped up his process. Too many games followed a familiar script: flashes of next-level throws followed by stretches where the consistency disappeared. There were glimpses of Allar looking like a future star, followed by moments where he was still trying to figure things out – it's why I gave him a fifth-round grade.

So when Pittsburgh selected him with the 76th overall pick, my initial reaction wasn't that the Steelers found a steal; it was that they drafted him a little too early.

The more interesting question, though, is whether I was focusing on the wrong things.

Because after digging through the data, revisiting the tape and examining the situation he's walking into in Pittsburgh, I came away believing Allar has a much better chance of outperforming his draft slot than I did a few weeks ago. And, look, the flaws remain. But what changed for me is how fixable many of those flaws appear to be, given the team that drafted him.

The model liked him more than I did

Part of the reason I rethought Allar had nothing to do with the Steelers.

I  wrote earlier this week about trying to project the best- and worst-case outcomes for five rookie quarterbacks in the '26 class using quarterback data from 2015-25. The goal wasn't to predict the future. It was to identify the traits most closely associated with quarterbacks who successfully graduated to the NFL .

And every time I ran the model, Allar kept outperforming expectations. And that forced me to ask a question: what was the model seeing that I wasn't?

One theme emerged repeatedly. The quarterbacks who transitioned most successfully weren't always the ones with the biggest stat lines or the strongest arms. The model consistently rewarded QBs who moved the chains, had meaningful starting experience and showed they could function when things weren't perfect around them.

His 37.9% first-down rate was among the best in the class and significantly better than the public conversation around him would suggest. While completion percentage and touchdown totals often fluctuate based on scheme and supporting cast, first-down rate gets closer to the question NFL teams are actually trying to answer: can this quarterback consistently keep an offense on schedule?

The data suggest he is certainly capable.

Allar also brought significant starting experience to the table. Historically, quarterbacks with more collegiate starts tend to handle the transition to the NFL better because they've seen more football. They've encountered more disguised coverages, more third-and-long situations, more blitz looks and more late-game pressure. Experience doesn't guarantee success, but it often raises the floor.

If the conversation stopped there, Allar might have been viewed as a second-round talent.

What's interesting is that none of these lines up particularly well with how I viewed Allar entering the draft. Based on the tape, I ultimately gave him a fifth-round grade. The physical tools were obvious, but I never felt like the production consistently matched the talent. Too often, I'd come away from games with the same notes: the footwork got frenetic when pressure arrived, the decision-making sped up, and the accuracy suffered when the pocket got muddy. There were flashes of a quarterback capable of making every NFL throw, but there were also long stretches where he looked uncomfortable operating when things weren't clean. When his 2025 campaign was cut short by injury, it felt less like a player building momentum toward the draft and more like a quarterback leaving evaluators with many of the same questions they'd had entering the season.

That's why I was surprised when the Steelers selected him in the third round. Had Allar landed with a team expecting him to start immediately, I probably would've viewed the pick much differently.

Part of my initial skepticism stemmed from opportunity cost. Third-round picks aren't lottery tickets. They're often expected to become contributors relatively quickly, whether that's a rotational pass rusher, a nickel corner, a swing tackle or a depth piece who eventually grows into a larger role. By selecting Allar, the Steelers weren't just betting on a developmental quarterback. They were passing on the chance to add a player who could potentially help them win games immediately.

At first glance, that's a fair criticism. But the more I looked at the board, the less compelling that argument became. Between Allar at No. 76 and Pittsburgh's next selection of CB Daylen Everette at No. 85, the board was filled with names who projected primarily as role players, developmental starters or depth pieces. The same held true for the next 10 picks, until the Steelers selected OL Gennings Dunker at No. 96. Basically:  there wasn't an obvious blue-chip prospect sitting on the board demanding to be selected.

That's what makes the Allar decision easier to defend. The Steelers weren't choosing between a developmental quarterback and an immediate-impact starter. They were choosing between a developmental quarterback with legitimate starting upside and a group of prospects who largely projected as role players, developmental starters or depth pieces. If Allar becomes even an average NFL starter, the calculus changes dramatically. Suddenly, the opportunity cost isn't the rotational defender or backup offensive lineman that Pittsburgh passed on. It's the quarterback Pittsburgh almost didn't take.

Why the tape told a different story

The tape complicated the evaluation. Going back through my notes from 2024 and 2025, I kept coming back to the same observation. Allar often looked like two different quarterbacks. At his best, he made some of the most impressive throws in the class. He could drive the football outside the numbers, layer throws over defenders and attack tight windows with anticipation. There were stretches where he looked every bit like an NFL starter.

But those periods where the pocket got muddy and everything sped up often followed those flashes. The footwork became hurried. The accuracy suffered. The decision-making wasn't always as clean. Several games featured the same pattern: confident, decisive throws early, followed by more erratic play once pressure began arriving consistently.

NFL teams weren't questioning whether he could make NFL throws. They were trying to determine whether he could consistently make NFL decisions when the environment became chaotic.

And that's where I think the story shifts.

Allar's weaknesses were real, but they were also largely developmental. His issues weren't arm strength, athletic limitations or a lack of playmaking ability. They were operational: pocket management, footwork, processing speed and confidence under pressure.

Those are difficult problems to solve. They're also the exact kinds of problems NFL coaching staffs spend years trying to fix.

Why Pittsburgh changes the conversation

And the more I looked at the fit in Pittsburgh – and the story the data were telling – the more it started to make sense. Pittsburgh isn't asking him to be the answer on Day 1. He's walking into a stable organization, a quarterback-friendly system and a coaching staff with a long history of developing talented, imperfect passers. Just as important: the issues that pushed him down my board – footwork, pocket discipline, processing under pressure and operational consistency – are the same areas Mike McCarthy has spent decades coaching.

Put another way: my skepticism about the player hasn't completely disappeared. The flaws I saw on tape are still there. What has changed is my confidence in the environment. The Steelers aren't betting on the quarterback Allar was at Penn State. They're betting on the quarterback he can become. And the more I looked at the data, McCarthy's track record and Pittsburgh's developmental plan, the easier it became to understand why they were willing to make that bet.

The Drake Maye blueprint

If you're looking for the optimistic path for Allar, it might look something like Drake Maye .

The comparison isn't perfect, but there are similarities. Going through my notes on Maye, many of the concerns sound familiar: inconsistent footwork, occasional accuracy lapses, a tendency to drift into pressure and stretches where he'd bypass easier throws in search of bigger plays downfield. Those concerns existed alongside flashes of a quarterback capable of making NFL throws that few players can. The anticipation, arm talent, athleticism and ability to create outside structure repeatedly showed up on tape. The data saw those traits too, which is one reason Maye projected so well despite the inconsistencies.

That's where things become less straightforward. Many of the concerns are similar, but so are the underlying strengths. The model liked Allar's combination of experience, first-down production and relatively low screen dependency, while the tape showed a quarterback capable of making throws most passers simply can't make. If the footwork becomes less frenetic, if the pocket management improves and if McCarthy can help him play more consistently on schedule, there's a version of this story where people look back in a few years and wonder how a quarterback with Allar's tools lasted until the third round.

So does the comp to Maye hold up? More than I thought it might.  If nothing else, the table below provides some useful context; the results are less about finding exact quarterback clones and more about identifying players who entered the NFL with similar questions. Some got there through the data. Others got there through the tape. And one QB kept showing up in both places.

Name

Similarity Score

Tape Profile

Starts

Time to Throw

Pressure %

Screen %

1D %

Drew Allar

-

-

35

2.84

29.2%

26.3%

37.9%

Michael Penix Jr .

94

65

45

2.64

27.4%

25.1%

37.5%

Jaxson Dart

92

75

41

2.81

31.8%

25.9%

36.2%

Jayden Daniels

89

60

55

2.92

29.6%

25.6%

37.0%

Drake Maye

87

90

30

2.86

33.6%

23.8%

36.7%

Similarity Score: Compares quarterbacks using the five variables that proved most predictive in the rookie-QB model: collegiate starts, time to throw, pressure rate, screen dependency and first-down rate. Higher scores indicate prospects whose statistical profiles most closely resembled Allar's entering the NFL.

Tape Profile: Based on my pre-draft scouting reports, comparing traits, play style, strengths, weaknesses and developmental concerns. Higher scores indicate quarterbacks whose overall scouting evaluations more closely mirrored Allar's coming out of college.

Penix Jr. emerged as Allar's closest statistical match, but Maye was the closest match when both the numbers and the scouting report were considered. Which is why Maye's developmental path may offer the clearest blueprint for what Pittsburgh hopes Allar eventually becomes.

Drew Allar

Drake Maye

Collegiate Starts

35

30

Time to Throw

2.84 sec

2.86 sec

Pressure Rate

29.2%

33.6%

Screen Dependency

26.3%

23.8%

First-Down Rate

37.9%

36.7%

Rushing Yards

732

1,209

Rushing TDs

12

16

Rushing First Downs

75

93

Missed Tackles Forced

66

55

Tackle-Avoidance Rate

23.0%

16.2%

Yards After Contact/Rush

3.72

3.88

Maye was the more productive runner, but the gap athletically isn't as large as you might think. Allar actually forced more missed tackles in college and posted a higher tackle-avoidance rate, reinforcing what occasionally showed up on tape: he's a better athlete than he gets

_Originally reported by [CBS Sports](https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/drew-allar-steelers-2026-nfl-draft/)._