QB Prospects 2012 "EOL" Mock Chart

With the end of the NFL season in sight, and the college football season officially over, it would appear that the time is right for the NFL Mock Draft season. It is a magical time where we all begin to ponder the great questions; "what if?", "should they?", "could they?" A time where we all attempt to play the role of 32 different GM’s to get the perfect new addition to better each team around the league (with the least amount of bias as possible).

And with the beginning of "Mock" season, I felt it would be a nice to start by ranking the incoming quarterback class of 2012.

Now we all have heard, and are increasingly aware, that Mr. Andrew Luck, Stanford, is widely considered the best QB in the upcoming draft (I have not personally seen a legitimate mock place Luck below number one overall). However, this does not mean that we shouldn’t dive fully into the QB list and explore every option from pick number one and on, with my "Expected Outcome List," or "EOL."

For this assessment of the future players of the NFL, I have created a system to attempt to find the best player around for each position. The system uses a combination of two professional mock’s, my own mock, a production ranking, and a weighted production ranking. The two professional mock’s come from and, two sites that I have found to be thorough and accurate in their scouting abilities (check the sites out yourself to judge). My own mock is created through my own “scouting” which includes game tape, live action, and my gut’s “intuition.”

The first production list is solely based on each players statistics through the years, specifically focusing on five key stats (which will be identified at the production chart), that are averaged to a typical 13 game season to eliminate the rankings being dominated by statistical anomalies or “one-hit wonders.” And weighted production is simply just the first production scores altered and re-aligned based on the specific conference the player was a part of (this will also be further explained when this chart is presented).

Whew. That was a mouthful, but onto the several charts I use to find the top player’s in their positions.

First up is and its list of the top ten QB’s in the nation as of January 16th, 2012, please make a note of the numbers located directly after each player’s school as this is the numerical value I have attached to that player’s spot on the ranking list;

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1. <!--[endif]-->Andrew Luck, Stanford (20)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2. <!--[endif]-->Robert Griffin III, Baylor (19)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M (18)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->4. <!--[endif]-->Nick Foles, Arizona (17)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->5. <!--[endif]-->Kirk Cousins, Michigan State (12)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->6. <!--[endif]-->Brandon Weeden, Oklahoma State (11)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->7. <!--[endif]-->Brock Osweiler, Arizona State (10)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->8. Ryan Lindley, San Diego State (9)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->9. <!--[endif]-->Chandler Harnish, Northern Illinois (4)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->10. <!--[endif]-->Russell Wilson, Wisconsin (3)

Again, let me explain that the number after the player’s school is used for the final computation I use to find the best position player’s. Please also note that because the two different mocks have differences in their top ten’s that the current numerical value does not reach 1 until the My Rankings and the Production charts. P.P.S. the numbers are grouped as 20, 19, 18, 17, 12, 11, 10, 9, 4, 3, 2, and 1 because I wanted there to be a bigger reward for being on top of each category and vice versa.

Second up is, and the list used here was last updated on January 9th, 2012 (all current changes to the players such as Tannehill’s broken foot is reflected in this list), and notice that the list does not really alter that much until the 8th player in their top ten;

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1. <!--[endif]-->Andrew Luck, Stanford (20)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2. <!--[endif]-->Robert Griffin III, Baylor (19)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M (18)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->4. <!--[endif]-->Nick Foles, Arizona (17)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->5. <!--[endif]-->Kirk Cousins, Michigan State (12)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->6. <!--[endif]-->Brock Osweiler, Arizona State (11)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->7. <!--[endif]-->Brandon Weeden, Oklahoma State (10)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->8. <!--[endif]-->Case Keenum, Houston (9)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->9. <!--[endif]-->Russell Wilson, Wisconsin (4)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->10. <!--[endif]-->Kellen Moore, Boise State (3)

Next is My Rankings of each of the top QB’s from both lists above, so this would make a top 12 for my list. My Rankings are based on game tape and gut instincts, which is why I have two professional mock’s, keeping the overall rankings balanced (let it be known that I do not believe size matters for being a QB but having back to back great receivers does not make you good *cough* Weeden *cough* either);

My Rankings

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1. <!--[endif]-->Andrew Luck, Stanford (20)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2. <!--[endif]-->Robert Griffin III, Baylor (19)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3. <!--[endif]-->Kirk Cousins, Michigan State (18)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->4. <!--[endif]-->Nick Foles, Arizona (17)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->5. <!--[endif]-->Kellen Moore, Boise State (12)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->6. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M (11)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->7. <!--[endif]-->Brock Osweiler, Arizona State (10)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->8. <!--[endif]-->Case Keenum, Houston (9)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->9. <!--[endif]-->Russell Wilson, Wisconsin (4)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->10. <!--[endif]-->Chandler Harnish, Northern Illinois (3)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->11. <!--[endif]-->Brandon Weeden, Oklahoma State (2)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->12. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Lindley, San Diego State (1)

Now here come the interesting parts, the Production chart. For QB’s, the five stats I use consists of; yards thrown per season, passing TD’s per season, completion percentage per season, interception rate per season (lowest value gets the top ranking for this stat), and total rushing ability (based on yards and TD’s). For each stat line each player is ranked just like the numbers used in the previous lists and then those numbers are added together, except for completion percentage and interception rate which are multiplied by two(because I deemed them the most important qualities in a QB) and rushing ability which is multiplied by ½. So the formula would look like this;

18+12+ (17 x 2) + (9 x 2) + (4 x ½) = 84 points.

Production Rankings

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1. <!--[endif]-->Case Keenum, Houston 115.0 points (20)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2. <!--[endif]-->Kellen Moore, Boise State 112.5 points (19)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3. <!--[endif]-->Robert Griffin III, Baylor 102.5 points (18)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->4. <!--[endif]-->Brandon Weeden, Oklahoma State 85.5 points (17)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->5. <!--[endif]-->Russell Wilson, Wisconsin 70.5 points (12)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->6. <!--[endif]-->Nick Foles, Arizona 69.5 points (11)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->7. <!--[endif]-->Andrew Luck, Stanford 68.0 points (10)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->8. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M 53.0 points (9)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->9. <!--[endif]-->Brock Osweiler, Arizona State 51.5 points (4)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->10. <!--[endif]-->Chandler Harnish, Northern Illinois 40.0 points (3)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->11. <!--[endif]-->Kirk Cousins, Michigan State 32.0 points (2)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->12. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Lindley, San Diego State 19.0 points (1)

*Only the numbers in parenthesis are attributed to the overall chart*

And now the final chart before the overall rankings of the QB position is the Weighted Production Rankings (WPR). The WPR is the same list used as the Production chart except each players points, such as Case Keenum’s 115 points in the above list, are multiplied by a fraction representing how good each player’s conference is, for example an SEC QB faces good defenses on a weekly basis so his multiplier would be a 10/12 but C-USA is multiplied by a mere 5/8 drastically reducing his points.

Weighted Production Rankings

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1. <!--[endif]-->Robert Griffin III, Baylor 76.9 points (20)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2. <!--[endif]-->Kellen Moore, Boise State 70.4 points (19)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3. <!--[endif]-->Brandon Weeden, Oklahoma State 64.1 points (18)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->4. <!--[endif]-->Case Keenum, Houston 62.5 points (17)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->5. <!--[endif]-->Russell Wilson, Wisconsin 55.8 points (12)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->6. <!--[endif]-->Nick Foles, Arizona 45.8 points (11)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->7. <!--[endif]-->Andrew Luck, Stanford 44.8 points (10)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->8. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M 39.8 points (9)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->9. <!--[endif]-->Brock Osweiler, Arizona State 33.9 points (4)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->10. <!--[endif]-->Chandler Harnish, Northern Illinois 31.7 points (3)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->11. <!--[endif]-->Kirk Cousins, Michigan State 25.3 points (2)

<!--[if !supportLists]-->12. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Lindley, San Diego State 11.9 points (1)

Now that all of the lists that factor into the final overall rankings are posted above, it is time to unveil the Expected Outcome List (EOL). The EOL is what I created to show my confidence in the top position players, meaning that the percentage points gained (similar to a batting average in baseball) is how successful I believe the player can be at the next level (*disclaimer* some players on the list, I believe, should be higher than others, but numbers don’t lie…often). The formula used for the final list is as follows; assigned number, assigned number, My Rankings assigned number, Production Rankings assigned number multiplied by 1.5, and the WPR’s assigned number multiplied by 2:

12+11+12+ (17 x 1.5) + (12 x 2) = 84.5

Upon finding the total combined value (such as 84.5 above), the value is then dived by the total amount of points available (in this case a player can achieve a total value of 130):

84.5/130 = 0.650

Expected Outcome List

<!--[if !supportLists]-->1. <!--[endif]-->Robert Griffin III, Baylor 0.954

<!--[if !supportLists]-->2. <!--[endif]-->Andrew Luck, Stanford 0.731

<!--[if !supportLists]-->3. <!--[endif]-->Nick Foles, Arizona 0.689

<!--[if !supportLists]-->4. <!--[endif]-->Brandon Weeden, Oklahoma State 0.650

<!--[if !supportLists]-->5. <!--[endif]-->Case Keenum, Houston 0.631

<!--[if !supportLists]-->6. <!--[endif]-->Kellen Moore, Boise State 0.627

<!--[if !supportLists]-->7. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Tannehill, Texas A&M 0.600

<!--[if !supportLists]-->8. <!--[endif]-->Russell Wilson, Wisconsin 0.408

<!--[if !supportLists]-->9. <!--[endif]-->Kirk Cousins, Michigan State 0.377

<!--[if !supportLists]-->10. <!--[endif]-->Brock Osweiler, Arizona State 0.346

<!--[if !supportLists]-->11. <!--[endif]-->Chandler Harnish, Northern Illinois 0.135

<!--[if !supportLists]-->12. <!--[endif]-->Ryan Lindley, San Diego State 0.104

As stated before, I personally believe that some of these players should be higher up on the list but this is what the formula gave me. For one example, I don’t think Luck should be dethroned from the number one spot, but that doesn’t mean RG3 won’t be a good NFL QB. Meanwhile, I would have Kirk Cousins higher up on the board and Brandon Weeden much lower on the list conversely. Remember the EOL is solely designed to assess the caliber of each player entering the 2012 NFL Draft, not where they will land in the upcoming Draft.

With these numbers it would appear that RG3 will be a better player than Luck in the NFL, and that may be true if he lands in the right system. Considering that Luck is all the more likely to be the number one overall pick with each passing day, we must acknowledge that with Luck the Colts will have to change their offensive game plan. I fully believe that Luck could run Payton’s offense with no problems but Luck is used to a ground-n-pound offense and he benefits from it greatly, such as; Cleveland, Jacksonville, Miami, New York (J), Oakland, Seattle, Tampa Bay, and Tennessee. This means that if RG3 did get drafted by a pass-heavy offense, which runs out of shotgun frequently, he could have a statistically greater year. These offenses include Arizona, Chicago, Dallas, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Minnesota, Philadelphia, and Washington.

So with the Draft coming up, it is fair to say that the teams at least interested in gaining a QB in one of the many rounds are; Arizona, Cleveland, Chicago, Dallas, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Miami, Minnesota, New York (J), Oakland, Philadelphia, Seattle, Tampa Bay, Tennessee, and Washington (a total of 16 potential landing spots). Now the 5 teams with the most immediate needs are; Cleveland, Indianapolis, Miami, Seattle, and Washington, more than likely.

Of these teams, I would say that the best QB fits for each (based on ability and familiarity with the offense, not the team’s corresponding pick) would be with Luck in Cleveland, RG3 in Indianapolis, Harnish in Miami, Cousins in Seattle, and Foles in Washington.

So there is my Mock Draft tool, feel free to leave comments about how the formula can be altered to show a better caliber level for each player. And please don’t be too mean about it (I worked really hard on this for several weeks to get it right).

And make sure to look out for my Running Back EOL in the following days; the Wide Receiver list will be out shortly too once updates its mocks to a date after December.

In This FanPost

Log In Sign Up

Log In Sign Up

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

I already have a Vox Media account!

Verify Vox Media account

Please login to your Vox Media account. This account will be linked to your previously existing Eater account.

Please choose a new SB Nation username and password

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

Your username will be used to login to SB Nation going forward.

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.


You must be a member of to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at You should read them.


You must be a member of to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at You should read them.




Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.