Making the Case: Drew Mestemaker Is the Best QB in the State

STILLWATER — For all the accolades thrown his way, it’s easy to forget that this fall will be Drew Mestemaker’s second season starting at quarterback since he joined the varsity ranks in high school.

All reps aren’t created equal, but there are undoubtedly true freshman quarterbacks with more total game reps than Mestemaker.

It should raise a few eyebrows as he steps up in competition this season, and might, if not for the palpable belief surrounding OSU’s program this spring.

“It feels like he makes the right checks,” receiver Chris Barnes said. “Like he knows, we be on the same page and stuff like that. Like, in my head, I’d be like, dang, I wish I could check it and next thing you know, he’d check it to something like I would want. So it’s just a little stuff like that, like him knowing the field, knowing the game.”

That kind of chemistry is noteworthy considering the Wake Forest transfer is one of the new guys getting to know Mestemaker this spring while others like UNT transfer Wyatt Young has more than a full season with Mestemaker under his belt.

It helps that Barnes knows a thing or two about quarterbacks.

“I’ve played with John Mateer, played with Robbie Ashford at Wake Forest, but I feel like, as me actually playing, I feel like Drew would be the best quarterback that I’ve played with,” Barnes said.

It isn’t just Barnes saying it. In the last week, both ESPN and CBS Sports ranked Power Four quarterbacks. Both sites had Mateer 19th in the nation, which would be a decent landing spot if they didn’t rank Mestemaker seventh and 14th, respectively.

Although the OSU program doesn’t have a leg to stand on based on the last two seasons, Mestemaker deserves to be a favorite over Mateer after he led the nation with 4,379 passing yards at UNT.

Here’s their per game stats last season:

Mestemaker: 339 passing yards, 9.5 yards per attempt, completed 68.9%, 0.6 interceptions, 6 rushing yards, 2.8 total touchdowns

Mateer: 240 passing yards, 7.3 yards per attempt, completed 62.2%, 0.9 interceptions, 36 rushing yards, 1.8 total touchdowns

Even looking at per game numbers and combining touchdowns still leaves a sizable gap between Mestermaker and the Sooner.

Before the folks in Norman drive up I-35, it’s fair to concede that Mateer played a much tougher schedule than Mestemaker did in 2025.

But Barnes played with Mateer in 2024 at Washington State, which was at the time one of two power conference teams who didn’t land inside a power conference. It seems reasonable to conclude Washington State had more resources than most non-power conference teams, but less talent than most teams inside the Power Four.

That sounds like a favorable comparison to North Texas from a talent standpoint anyway, and the Cougars played two Power Conference teams, Boise State and fellow in-betweener Oregon State in the regular season that year. That’s a harder schedule than what the Mean Green played last year, but it’s definitely close enough to compare.

So let’s see how Mestemaker stacks up against 2024 Mateer then use the 2025 numbers to establish a baseline for what might be reasonable to expect from Mestemaker in his first fall at the power conference level.

Here are Mateer’s 2024 per game stats:

261 passing yards, 9 yards per attempt, completed 64.6%, 0.6 interceptions per game, 69 rushing yards, 3.7 total touchdowns.

Mateer lost 21 passing yards, 1.7 yards per attempt, 2.4% off his completion percentage, 33 rushing yards and nearly two touchdowns per game when he moved to the SEC.

If Mestemaker took the exact same hit in each category then he’d average 312 passing yards, 7.5 yards per attempt, 66.3%, 0.9 interceptions, 3 rushing yards and 1.4 touchdowns per game.

No matter how you slice it, Mestemaker deserves to win the opening round, but it seems worth noting that Mateer lost half his rushing and half his passing touchdowns. The Big 12 defenses shouldn’t be quite so punishing, but considering Oregon is on the schedule, Mestemaker’s touchdown totals might be lower than people expect after he found the end zone 34 times through the air and another five times on the ground last season.

Scoreboard: Mestemaker 1, Mateer 0

Rushing Through

Note: Previously official rushing stats were included. For this Pro Football Focus stats will be used which seems to ignore some or all sacks when it comes to rushing totals.

Mestemaker: 211 yards, averaged 4.7 yards a carry, five touchdowns

Mateer ‘24: 1,008 yards, 6.8 average, 15 touchdowns

Mateer ‘25: 546 yards, 4.2 average, eight touchdowns

Mateer is the huge winner here, which is probably fine with folks in Stillwater who want to see their quarterback upright as much as possible.

This shouldn’t change the argument, but the numbers got a lot closer when PFF just looked at scrambles

Mestemaker averaged 7.8 yards on 21 scrambles. Mateer averaged 8.6 yards on 47 attempts in 2024 and 6.6 on 28 scrambles last season.

Scoreboard: Mestemaker 1, Mateer 1

Going Deep

Here’s how the quarterbacks looked on passes thrown at least 20 yards downfield:

Mestemaker: 19-of-49 (38.8%) for 758 yards, 8 touchdowns and an interception

Mateer ‘24: 25-of-63 (39.7%) for 821 yards, 12 touchdowns and 6 interceptions

Mateer ‘25: 17-of-51 (33%) for 542 yards, three touchdowns and two interceptions

PFF also graded these throws out as Big Time Throws, “a pass with excellent ball location and timing, generally thrown further down the field and/or into a tighter window,” and Turnover Worthy Plays, “a pass that has a high percentage chance to be intercepted or a poor job of taking care of the ball and fumbling.”

Mestemaker: 18 Big Timers (37%), five TO worthy plays (10%)

Mateer ‘24: 17 Big Timers (27%), eight TO worthy plays (13%)

Mateer ‘25: 10 Big Timers (20%), four TO worthy plays (8%)

Mateer pushed the ball downfield significantly less last season than he did at Washington State. This was particularly impactful when it came to his touchdowns, though he also managed to cut his turnover worthy plays in half when looking deep.

Both desperation and defensive breakdowns can sometimes drive deep attempts, so it’s hard to make a firm prediction for Mestemaker in this category. It wouldn’t be shocking to see his 2026 numbers mirror what Mateer did in 2025.

This is another point for the Cowboy primarily because of the Big Time throw discrepancy. Mateer’s four extra touchdowns somewhat washes out with his additional five interceptions, but this was closer than expected.

Scoreboard: Mestemaker 2, Mateer 1

Under Pressure

​All these numbers are starting to run together. Let’s take a quick breather before we wrap up with even more numbers.

Mestemaker’s screen numbers are eerily similar with what Mateer did last season at OU. The Sooner was slightly worse on screens at Washington State, but not by much and Mateer leans on that stuff noticeably less than his Cowboy counterpart.

This sounds like a good old fashioned draw.

When given a clean pocket, Mestemaker is slightly more accurate and makes a handful of fewer mistakes than Mateer did when he was at Washington State. At Oklahoma, Mateer’s Big Time throws were cut in half and he made a few more turnover worthy plays when his protection kept him clean.

When under pressure, Mestemaker completed passes at a slightly higher rate for about a yard more per attempt than Mateer did in 2024. The Cowboy completed Big Timers under these conditions about twice as often, but he also finished with more turnover worthy plays. In fact, Mestemaker tossed five interceptions last season while under pressure when Mateer threw none during his time with the Cougars, though it seems like he fumbled a few times on those plays.

In 2025, Mateer’s completion percentage and yards per attempt dropped even more, but he did deliver Big Timers more than twice as often as well.

In 2026, it seems reasonable to assume Mestemaker will stay roughly as productive on screens, lose a little bit of these big scoring plays that come when given a clean pocket and will keep the ball a little closer to home and avoid chucking it quite as deep when he’s under pressure.

As for the scoreboard, Mestemaker seems to have a decisive edge when given space to work while Mateer has the slightest edge when under pressure.

Scoreboard: Mestemaker 2.5, Mateer 1.5

Home Stretch

​Pro Football Focus also breaks down how quarterbacks perform in the midrange 10-19 yards downfield. This was probably the worst spot for former Cowboys Zane Flores and Sam Jackson who combined to go 28-of-54 for 420 yards, a touchdown and four interceptions in 2025.

All of these numbers will be much better than that.

Mestemaker: 77-of-118 (65.3%) for 1,439 yards, nine touchdowns and three interceptions

Mateer ‘24: 40-of-67 (59.7%) for 704 yards, 6 touchdowns and an interception

Mateer ‘25: 45-of-83 (54.2%) for 870 yards, 7 touchdowns and four interceptions

Mestemaker averaged 12.2 yards per attempt while Mateer averaged 10.5 both seasons. PFF thought Mestemaker looked better on the eye test, awarding him with six Big Time Throws while giving Mateer only one in 2024 and three in 2025.

Mestemaker was credited with three turnover worthy plays while Mateer received only three in 2024 before committing 10 last season with the Sooners.

Interestingly enough Mateer’s production more or less stayed the same despite the move to the SEC. He finished with more yards, but took more attempts to do it since his completion percentage​ took a hit. He did toss an extra three interceptions.

Even if we knock a yard off Mestemaker’s average per attempt and give him a 60% completion rate, given the same number of attempts, he should throw for 1,203 yards on passes between 10-19 yards downfield.

Someone wearing Crimson and Cream could ding Mestemaker for his additional mistakes and argue it’s more important to take care of the football. That would be a fair point if he didn’t more than double Mateer’s yardage total while also finishing nearly 6% better.

Based on in-game results, it seems safe to conclude Mestemaker is a better quarterback than Mateer was when he arrived in Norman last year. He’s also less experienced overall.

That would be concerning if taking care of the football wasn’t one of his strengths (Mestemaker ranked 40th nationally among quarterbacks with 50 dropbacks in percentage of turnover-worthy plays).

While it’s impossible to project with certainty how his stats might finish next season, it seems reasonable to assume his improvements during his first offseason as the unquestioned starter could minimize what should be a statistical step back against power conference competition.

Final Scoreboard: Mestemaker 3.5, Mateer 1.5