Gunner Stockton omitted from Joel Klatt’s top-10 returning quarterbacks list

Georgia quarterback Gunner Stockton enters the 2026 season with a resume that should turn heads, yet he is not listed among the top-10 returning report-callers in a new projection from Joel Klatt. In a June 22 piece published by Yahoo Sports, Klatt left Stockton off his returning-quarterback board for 2026, a notable omission given Stockton’s impact during the 2025 season and Georgia’s run of conference championships.

The decision stands out because Stockton’s 2025 campaign did not stay under the radar. According to the Yahoo Sports report, Stockton finished in the top-10 of the Heisman Trophy voting for the 2025 college football season. He also helped power the Bulldogs to what the report describes as back-to-back SEC titles, making the omission feel less like a minor ranking tweak and more like a deliberate evaluation of what matters most heading into 2026.

Klatt’s list, framed around returning quarterbacks, is essentially a question of projection: how quarterbacks should be valued based on what comes next. In that context, the ranking is less about whether Stockton had a strong 2025 season and more about whether Klatt believes other returning quarterbacks bring greater near-term upside for 2026. The Yahoo report does not cite additional measurable reasons in its preview, so the difference in evaluation is the story itself.

Georgia’s quarterback room will still be judged by production, not by pundit lists. But rankings like Klatt’s can shape conversation in the preseason window, where media attention often attaches to the names most prominently displayed. For Stockton, being left out could mean he starts the cycle outside the top tier of the headline narrative, even though the same report links him to both Heisman prominence and team success in 2025.

The backdrop is SEC quarterback talent and the turnover of college football expectations from season to season. Returning-quarterback rankings often reward quarterbacks who combine experience with either a unique statistical profile or a clearer path to sustaining elite efficiency. With Stockton, the tension is that the report pairs him with major accomplishments, yet still removes him from Klatt’s top-10 returning list, suggesting Klatt’s criteria may lean toward specific styles of play or forward-looking estimates not captured by Heisman placement alone.

For Georgia fans, the practical implication is straightforward. Stockton’s job in 2026 will be to convert skepticism into results, especially in a conference where titles require more than one strong season. For the wider college football audience, the question is whether other quarterbacks listed above Stockton justify their ranking through continued production, while Stockton closes the gap through accuracy, decision-making, and sustained scoring drives.

What to watch next is how the market responds around Georgia’s offense once training camp evaluation and early fall games begin to remove ambiguity. If Stockton’s 2026 output aligns with the level of play implied by his 2025 Heisman standing and conference success, the “snub” will read as a preseason forecasting miss. If production falls short, the ranking will look prescient. Either way, Klatt’s omission sets up a classic preseason debate, with Georgia’s quarterback as the central figure.