Article 7530Z Why do the Jets own the top pick in the second round of the 2026 NFL Draft?

Why do the Jets own the top pick in the second round of the 2026 NFL Draft?

by
from on (#7530Z)
3608921a1e5b16d9ba9ebbd3cee1e91aFeb 24, 2026; Indianapolis, IN, USA; New York Jets coach Aaron Glenn speaks at the NFL Scouting Combine at the Indiana Convention Center. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-Imagn Images | Kirby Lee-Imagn Images

The Jets own the second pick in first round the 2026 NFL Draft. However, the team also has the top pick in the second round.

You might be wondering why this is.

The Jets finished at 3-14 in 2025. That tied them with the Raiders, Cardinals, and Titans for the worst record in the league. For NFL Draft purposes, the first tiebreaker is strength of schedule. The Raiders had the easiest schedule of the four teams, which netted them the top overall pick. The Jets had the second easiest. Then the Cardinals had the third easiest. The Titans had the hardest among the four worst teams.

The tiebreaker only applies for the first round, however. Among teams that are tied, positioning in the NFL Draft alternates by round.

Thus in the second round the Jets get the top pick followed by the Cardinals, the Titans, and then the Raiders.

The Cardinals own the top pick in the third round. Then come the Titans followed by the Raiders and the Jets (whose pick was traded to the Eagles in 2024 for Haason Reddick).

Then in the fourth round the Titans have the top pick followed in order by the Raiders, Jets, and Cardinals.

Things reset in the fifth round, and the trend continues for the rest of the NFL Draft (although the Jets have traded their original fifth, sixth, and seventh round picks).

The same style of tiebreaker is in place across the NFL Draft whenever multiple teams finish the regular season tied.

External Content
Source RSS or Atom Feed
Feed Location http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/rss.xml
Feed Title
Feed Link https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/
Feed Copyright Copyright (c) 2026 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Reply 0 comments