NFL rumors: Vikings interest in Daniel Jones reunion gets major update

The NFL franchise tag window is now open, and the free agency “legal tampering period starts March 10. So, teams are starting to put their 2025 plans into action as the offseason starts in earnest. For the Minnesota Vikings, that may mean locking up failed former New York Giants quarterback Daniel Jones to a new deal.

After reviving Sam Darnold’s career in 2024, the Vikings aren’t willing to franchise tag him at $41.3 million for next season or give him a market-level contract at around the same price. They have 2024 first-round pick J.J. McCarthy coming back from an injury and, maybe, Jones still in the mix, according to ESPN reporter Jeremy Fowler.

“Daniel Jones could make some sense [for the Vikings]. I’m told that he’s still on the table as an option He was in the building last year. He would be a cheaper alternative to Sam Darnold,” Fowler reported.

Keeping Jones as a backup or bridge starter to get to McCarthy—who the Vikings view as their future franchise quarterback—makes a lot of sense. It is what the plan was last year when they signed Darnold, another early first-round pick who got ruined by a New Jersey-based organization.

McCarthy going down and Darnold stepping up was a surprise but also may have given the Vikings, general manager Kwesi Adofo-Mensah, and head coach Kevin O’Connell confidence that they can make lemonade out of lemons again with Jones.

Jones was a winning quarterback for one season. In 2022, he went 9-6-1 as the Giants’ starter and led his team to a playoff berth. He even won a postseason game that season, ironically, against the Vikings.

If McCarthy is ready to go, can stay healthy for the majority of the season, and looks like a legit NFL signal-caller, then the Vikings re-signing Daniel Jones makes a lot of sense. That said, it is a risk, especially if McCarthy isn’t ready for whatever reason and Darnold finds success again somewhere else.

In that case, there will be a lot of pressure on Jones to be good, and we all know that, historically, that doesn’t usually work out too well.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*