What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

QB Sam Darnold, SEA (1 Viewer)

If JJ isn't healthy? My first thought would be they transition tag Darnold for the year until JJ is healthy, but then who's out there as a potential replacement if the Raiders or someone offers a stupid deal the Vikes won't match?
Reportedly JJM is progressing well.
The only thing I have seen is he underwent another repair in November - that doesn't sound good, is this not a concern? Are they other progress updates I haven't seen?
No - it was to address swelling, and was described as "routine and "not a setback" at the time. One report I'd read said it wasn't "surgery" so much as a biologic injection (PRP) to aid with swelling in rehab.

As someone who traded for him during our rookie draft I've followed it as closely as the Vikings. lol
 
If JJ isn't healthy? My first thought would be they transition tag Darnold for the year until JJ is healthy, but then who's out there as a potential replacement if the Raiders or someone offers a stupid deal the Vikes won't match?
Reportedly JJM is progressing well.
The only thing I have seen is he underwent another repair in November - that doesn't sound good, is this not a concern? Are they other progress updates I haven't seen?
No - it was to address swelling, and was described as "routine and "not a setback" at the time. One report I'd read said it wasn't "surgery" so much as a biologic injection (PRP) to aid with swelling in rehab.

As someone who traded for him during our rookie draft I've followed it as closely as the Vikings. lol
Regardless of the phrasing. Going back into the knee to address swelling is not a good thing. That would be a setback.
 
Is he Kirk Cousins or is he Daniel Jones or is he Mitch Trubisky?
Out of those three? Closest to Daniel Jones, and you know how that worked out.
Better arm talent than all three. Not sure if he can improve mentally when things are not going his way. Putting him on a less talented roster will not help which makes me wonder if he would be willing to take a reasonable deal to stay with MIN if they had any interest.
 
and trust that if things turn sideways I can do at least 80% with Danny Dimes what I did with Darnold.
He's not under contract any longer either and with so many QB needy teams his market might be bigger then people think, should be a decent amount more then the Vikings paid Darnold this past year and a lot more then they might want to pay Jones.
 
Is he Kirk Cousins or is he Daniel Jones or is he Mitch Trubisky?
Out of those three? Closest to Daniel Jones, and you know how that worked out.
Better arm talent than all three. Not sure if he can improve mentally when things are not going his way. Putting him on a less talented roster will not help which makes me wonder if he would be willing to take a reasonable deal to stay with MIN if they had any interest.
Agree with what you are saying on their talent and a less talented roster won't help him but while I do think he did cost himself a large chunk of money with his play the last two weeks I still think he did enough during the season to get a decent contract as a starting QB in this league. He just dropped from the Goff type of money into Baker/Geno land. I think he'll have a better shot of obtaining that from a team without a QB in waiting and he's probably be aware that his leash or time as the starting QB was extremely short and if he was signed to a Mayfield/Geno type deal he'd just be trade bait once JJ took over. So my guess is he won't put a lot of stock in MIN being a good situation because he'd know that situation is tenuous.

For the Vikings there are a few vet QB's available that should be very cheap and would likely welcome playing in this offense as backup/bridge starters. But if they go a younger route, and to a young struggling QB they would be a perfect place to rehab their careers, I see a guy like Zach Wilson making a lot of sense. Really.
 
Again, franchising him makes too much sense in this case. ~40m is not a huge investment to make in a guy who has ~9 months in KOC's system
That's about 30% of the team's cap space over the next 2 years
That tracks for a 1 year deal. League average in 2024 was 22% mostly due to longer term contracts for the big guns....and Watson.
Do you think that is a good business decision? Do you expect the team paying that price to be happy with their return on investment? Their fans?
Absolutely, it's a good business decision to franchise Darnold. JJM hasn't played a snap of real NFL football and is essentially a rookie prospect. I expect KOC knows what he has in Darnold and will tweak the offense even more to play to his strengths. If, for whatever reason, Darnold busts in 25, they owe nothing for 26. On the flip side, if Darnold plays to his 24 regular season levels in 26, they can sign him to a backloaded contract like all QBs get these days to help offset the cap hit a bit.

If I were the Vikings, I would be extremely nervous going into 25 with a rookie and Danny Dimes (potentially) as my QB room.
I'm admittedly more comfortable with risk to try to maximize success, but I'd much MUCH rather spend those dollars building the team around JJ and trust that if things turn sideways I can do at least 80% with Danny Dimes what I did with Darnold.
So you're ok with 3400 yards / 28 TDs and a "few more pieces"? That would put Dimes in the bottom half of the league as far as QB play goes. As suggested above, his market is likely more than most are admitting right now. So, maybe you get Dimes for $12-15 mil on a 1 or 2 year deal? That gives you 25-28mil to resign your guys and add pieces. How many actual difference makers are you getting for that?

I just don't think the risk of letting Darnold walk is worth the potential reward at a position that has become hypercritical in the modern NFL.
 
Again, franchising him makes too much sense in this case. ~40m is not a huge investment to make in a guy who has ~9 months in KOC's system
That's about 30% of the team's cap space over the next 2 years
That tracks for a 1 year deal. League average in 2024 was 22% mostly due to longer term contracts for the big guns....and Watson.
Do you think that is a good business decision? Do you expect the team paying that price to be happy with their return on investment? Their fans?
Absolutely, it's a good business decision to franchise Darnold. JJM hasn't played a snap of real NFL football and is essentially a rookie prospect. I expect KOC knows what he has in Darnold and will tweak the offense even more to play to his strengths. If, for whatever reason, Darnold busts in 25, they owe nothing for 26. On the flip side, if Darnold plays to his 24 regular season levels in 26, they can sign him to a backloaded contract like all QBs get these days to help offset the cap hit a bit.

If I were the Vikings, I would be extremely nervous going into 25 with a rookie and Danny Dimes (potentially) as my QB room.
I'm admittedly more comfortable with risk to try to maximize success, but I'd much MUCH rather spend those dollars building the team around JJ and trust that if things turn sideways I can do at least 80% with Danny Dimes what I did with Darnold.
So you're ok with 3400 yards / 28 TDs and a "few more pieces"? That would put Dimes in the bottom half of the league as far as QB play goes. As suggested above, his market is likely more than most are admitting right now. So, maybe you get Dimes for $12-15 mil on a 1 or 2 year deal? That gives you 25-28mil to resign your guys and add pieces. How many actual difference makers are you getting for that?

I just don't think the risk of letting Darnold walk is worth the potential reward at a position that has become hypercritical in the modern NFL.
There is a flip side risk that needs to be accounted for and that is what if Darnold is the same guy he's always been before the perfect storm of this season? That means the 12-15 million for dimes is money better spent than coughing up 30+million for the same or less production.
 
Again, franchising him makes too much sense in this case. ~40m is not a huge investment to make in a guy who has ~9 months in KOC's system
That's about 30% of the team's cap space over the next 2 years
That tracks for a 1 year deal. League average in 2024 was 22% mostly due to longer term contracts for the big guns....and Watson.
Do you think that is a good business decision? Do you expect the team paying that price to be happy with their return on investment? Their fans?
Absolutely, it's a good business decision to franchise Darnold. JJM hasn't played a snap of real NFL football and is essentially a rookie prospect. I expect KOC knows what he has in Darnold and will tweak the offense even more to play to his strengths. If, for whatever reason, Darnold busts in 25, they owe nothing for 26. On the flip side, if Darnold plays to his 24 regular season levels in 26, they can sign him to a backloaded contract like all QBs get these days to help offset the cap hit a bit.

If I were the Vikings, I would be extremely nervous going into 25 with a rookie and Danny Dimes (potentially) as my QB room.
I'm admittedly more comfortable with risk to try to maximize success, but I'd much MUCH rather spend those dollars building the team around JJ and trust that if things turn sideways I can do at least 80% with Danny Dimes what I did with Darnold.
So you're ok with 3400 yards / 28 TDs and a "few more pieces"? That would put Dimes in the bottom half of the league as far as QB play goes. As suggested above, his market is likely more than most are admitting right now. So, maybe you get Dimes for $12-15 mil on a 1 or 2 year deal? That gives you 25-28mil to resign your guys and add pieces. How many actual difference makers are you getting for that?

I just don't think the risk of letting Darnold walk is worth the potential reward at a position that has become hypercritical in the modern NFL.
There is a flip side risk that needs to be accounted for and that is what if Darnold is the same guy he's always been before the perfect storm of this season? That means the 12-15 million for dimes is money better spent than coughing up 30+million for the same or less production.
No doubt. There's also the chance that we get 2500/10TD/20INT from Danny Dimes and JJM never plays a snap in the NFL. At the end of the day, as GM, you want to put your team in the best position to make the playoffs and advance as possible. Right now, without seeing JJM play or knowing if he's going to be ready, that best option is to franchise Darnold.
 
and trust that if things turn sideways I can do at least 80% with Danny Dimes what I did with Darnold.
He's not under contract any longer either and with so many QB needy teams his market might be bigger then people think, should be a decent amount more then the Vikings paid Darnold this past year and a lot more then they might want to pay Jones.

Plenty of folks here are overthinking "did Darnold cost himself money because of his last 2 games."

By far the bigger relevant question is "how many teams desperately want/need a new QB, and how many realistic options are there in the draft and free agency to obtain one?" Then it's a much more of a math problem of supply/demand.

The "supply" of QBs most teams would consider as "QB1 who won't get me fired" for 2025: Sam Darnold, Shedeur Sanders, Cam Ward. Total = 3

The "demand" of teams definitely in the hunt for a QB: CLE, TN, LV, NYG. Total = 4.


More "demand" than "supply" therefore Darnold will get paid a decent amount. Whether on the franchise tag by MIN or a contract from another team, the dude is going to get at least $40mm/year for at least 3 years.


Oversimplifying things a bit because there are other teams out there who may need a QB but aren't desperate (yet) like NYJ, NO, PIT. And at least a couple teams who might opportunistically grab a QB. Those teams are where I figure all the 2nd tier QB options will fall to one of them (Jalen Milroe, Russell Wilson, etc.)


For those playing at home, here's the 2025 FA list for QBs:

Sam Darnold, Russell Wilson, Daniel Jones, Mac Jones, Jameis Winston, Justin Fields, Marcus Mariota, Mason Rudolph, Andy Dalton, Jacoby Brissett .

Possible cut or trade candidates: Aaron Rodgers, Kirk Cousins, Gardner Minshew, Geno Smith, Derek Carr, Will Levis.
 
If JJ isn't healthy? My first thought would be they transition tag Darnold for the year until JJ is healthy, but then who's out there as a potential replacement if the Raiders or someone offers a stupid deal the Vikes won't match?
Reportedly JJM is progressing well.
The only thing I have seen is he underwent another repair in November - that doesn't sound good, is this not a concern? Are they other progress updates I haven't seen?
No - it was to address swelling, and was described as "routine and "not a setback" at the time. One report I'd read said it wasn't "surgery" so much as a biologic injection (PRP) to aid with swelling in rehab.

As someone who traded for him during our rookie draft I've followed it as closely as the Vikings. lol
Regardless of the phrasing. Going back into the knee to address swelling is not a good thing. That would be a setback.
Or a normal follow-up procedure. Which is how it was described. :shrug:

Again, it sounds like he got a shot - it reportedly wasn’t “surgery” or “repair”. A repair would be a setback. Getting a PRP injection is becoming more standard as part of rehab processes.
 
Last edited:
FYI, Greg Cosell on 95.7 the game just said that game wasn’t on Darnold, and “anyone who’s putting that on Darnold just doesn’t know football.”

He went on to say “you can’t judge it watching it on TV. If you haven’t watched the all 22, you shouldn’t be commenting on it.”

So that’s pretty strong.
:oldunsure:

ETA: don’t shoot the messenger. :scared:
 
Last edited:
If not franchised, I'd expect Darnold to sign a contract on the order of what Baker Mayfield signed in 2024 (3 years, 100mil). Let's say 3 years 125mil to account for cap inflation. If he had strong games vs DET and LAR, he likely could have commanded on the order of 5 years 225mil, again assuming no franchise tag. So it isn't out of reason to think that he's cost himself $100mil over this next contract. Of course that doesn't take into account a 2nd contract in the 3year vs 5 year scenario, but that contract is far from guaranteed.
Not a chance he gets $45M a year on a long term deal. He might get that on a shorter deal that's backloaded and light on guarantees but no shot he gets it all after a single year. 3 years $150M with $35M/$50M/$55M that they can get out of with minimal damage if he regresses was the best he was going to do.
He’s only cost himself $ if you think a team was gonna give him 5/250M.
You don't think there's a difference between $100M and $250M? Between $33M per year and $50M per year?

Some wild takes in here. The reality is that he was probably always getting the FT and these two games didn't change anything. An organization isn't going to do a full-on about face based on one comeback year they are going to keep their options open as much as possible. The Baker contact is little more than a glorified FT - it paid out $32M cash for 2024 with $10M more guaranteed for 2025 and if he had stunk they could have walked away with a modest $42M total liability for a year.
No, I don’t believe 250M was ever on the table.

The difference is basic math.

The presumption that someone was going to give Darnold 5/250 is a fiction, created for this narrative. I’ve never seen it anywhere outside this topic.

that’s why I challenged that narrative. To me that was the single wildest take in here, to use your colloquialism.
 
I'm probably playing Checkers instead of Chess but where does Darnold fall in the top 32? I think he's solidly a second to third quartile guy next year and that's going to lead to some money coming his way.
 
I'm probably playing Checkers instead of Chess but where does Darnold fall in the top 32? I think he's solidly a second to third quartile guy next year and that's going to lead to some money coming his way.

Top 20 with opportunity to go higher if he's not a one-year wonder. My tiers:

Elite:

1. Josh Allen
2. Lamar Jackson

High End QB1:
3. Jalen Hurts
4. Joe Burrow
5. Patrick Mahomes
6. Jared Goff

Need 1 more year of evidence to rank higher:

7. Jayden Daniels
8. CJ Stroud

QB1 but streaky:

9. Baker Mayfield
10. Jordan Love
11. Justin Herbert
12. Brock Purdy

Good when not hurt:

13. Kyler Murray
14. Dak Prescott
15. Tua Tagovailoa
16. Matthew Stafford

Looks great for stretches, then implodes:

17. Trevor Lawrence
18. Geno Smith
19. Sam Darnold (2024 season)
20. Derek Carr

Looks bad for most of season but really good 2-3 games a year:

Sam Darnold (2018-2023)
 
I'm probably playing Checkers instead of Chess but where does Darnold fall in the top 32? I think he's solidly a second to third quartile guy next year and that's going to lead to some money coming his way.

Top 20 with opportunity to go higher if he's not a one-year wonder. My tiers:

Elite:

1. Josh Allen
2. Lamar Jackson

High End QB1:
3. Jalen Hurts
4. Joe Burrow
5. Patrick Mahomes
6. Jared Goff

Need 1 more year of evidence to rank higher:

7. Jayden Daniels
8. CJ Stroud

QB1 but streaky:

9. Baker Mayfield
10. Jordan Love
11. Justin Herbert
12. Brock Purdy

Good when not hurt:

13. Kyler Murray
14. Dak Prescott
15. Tua Tagovailoa
16. Matthew Stafford

Looks great for stretches, then implodes:

17. Trevor Lawrence
18. Geno Smith
19. Sam Darnold (2024 season)
20. Derek Carr

Looks bad for most of season but really good 2-3 games a year:

Sam Darnold (2018-2023)
I can (mostly) agree with this. I have him top
1/3 of the pack. I actually put him above TLaw at this point. I’ve been a TLaw advocate for a while but until he proves otherwise he’s Daniel Jones with better pedigree & hair.

I think he’s quite a bit better than Geno Smith, and potentially better than Murray (though they are vastly different types of QBs)

So yeah - I wouldn’t die on this hill, but I have him 1 tier higher with the Murray/Stafford bunch. Stafford looked plenty terrible at times this year, but his mental acuity is way better than Darnold.
 
As suggested above, his market is likely more than most are admitting right now. So, maybe you get Dimes for $12-15 mil on a 1 or 2 year deal?
KOC has built an environment in which QB's that want to rehab their image go to him. If Dimes is more concerned about an extra few dollars than a comeback, then this isn't gonna work anyway. Move onto someone else. Reality is if there is a market for him at this price elsewhere on a bad team, I think he signs for less $ to be paired with KOC.

Franchising (then not trading) Sam only makes sense if you think there's more than he showed this year.
 
Franchising (then not trading) Sam only makes sense if you think there's more than he showed this year.
Or if they don’t believe in JJM
(Which I don’t believe is the case)
Of course, but there a much MUCH bigger problems in the Vikings front office if they don't believe in JJ after seeing him for a month of OTA and a few weeks of camp with a good preseason cameo intertwined.
 
I wonder if Los Vegas would be attractive place for Darnold if Ben Johnson takes the job. I mean he making Goff look like an all pro, I mean the guys in the trenches have a lot to do with it as well. I am thinking a 2-3 bridge QB deal. I think los Vegas is actually more malleable to change than some of the other organizations.
We can dream but I see zero chance MIN lets Darnold out of the building. Why let someone else make him look like an all-pro when you just did it? $40M is nothing for a QB and the biggest bargain in the league for what they got out of him. The only question they have is if they trust him to repeat it but NFL teams generally treat this as a case of trusting themselves (coaches, system, culture) to get as much out of the player as they do the actual player.
Zero, LOL. The team that didn't offer Cousins 30 M per season is going to franchise Darnold for 40 M? According to KOC, the Vikings already have a franchise QB in the building and his name isn't Sam Darnold.

The people suggesting that Darnold has to be re-signed are basically the same so-called scouts that hated JJ McCarthy as a QB prospect: Spielman, Greg Cossell, and some assistant high school coach that wrote a book on football.
 
I'm probably playing Checkers instead of Chess but where does Darnold fall in the top 32? I think he's solidly a second to third quartile guy next year and that's going to lead to some money coming his way.

Top 20 with opportunity to go higher if he's not a one-year wonder. My tiers:

Elite:

1. Josh Allen
2. Lamar Jackson

High End QB1:
3. Jalen Hurts
4. Joe Burrow
5. Patrick Mahomes
6. Jared Goff

Need 1 more year of evidence to rank higher:

7. Jayden Daniels
8. CJ Stroud

QB1 but streaky:

9. Baker Mayfield
10. Jordan Love
11. Justin Herbert
12. Brock Purdy

Good when not hurt:

13. Kyler Murray
14. Dak Prescott
15. Tua Tagovailoa
16. Matthew Stafford

Looks great for stretches, then implodes:

17. Trevor Lawrence
18. Geno Smith
19. Sam Darnold (2024 season)
20. Derek Carr

Looks bad for most of season but really good 2-3 games a year:

Sam Darnold (2018-2023)

Always really like reading rankings POV's...a couple of points outs from my own POV.

1. I certainly understand Mahomes ranking high as a disappointing season for him now constitutes a low QB1 standard, it is relevant to point out that he's not produced at a high QB1 level without an elite weapon like Cheetah/Prime Kelce in his career.

2. Jayden & CJ. Obviously the last 2 #2 overall picks and wanting to see 1 more season of high level production at their best is fair. but so far, top tier 'one season' we've seen out of both has Jayden >>> CJ.

3. Baker & Goff feel like the same guy to me although Baker has underrated rushing chops (378/3 in 2024).

4. Feel like there may be a category missing since Bo Nix, Drake Maye & Bryce Young have been omitted.
 
1. I certainly understand Mahomes ranking high as a disappointing season for him now constitutes a low QB1 standard, it is relevant to point out that he's not produced at a high QB1 level without an elite weapon like Cheetah/Prime Kelce in his career.
....you mean other than winning the last two Super Bowls?
 
1. I certainly understand Mahomes ranking high as a disappointing season for him now constitutes a low QB1 standard, it is relevant to point out that he's not produced at a high QB1 level without an elite weapon like Cheetah/Prime Kelce in his career.
....you mean other than winning the last two Super Bowls?
Are we talking FF or real life?
I was looking at it from a real life QB perspective.
 

For those playing at home, here's the 2025 FA list for QBs:

Sam Darnold, Russell Wilson, Daniel Jones, Mac Jones, Jameis Winston, Justin Fields, Marcus Mariota, Mason Rudolph, Andy Dalton, Jacoby Brissett .

Possible cut or trade candidates: Aaron Rodgers, Kirk Cousins, Gardner Minshew, Geno Smith, Derek Carr, Will Levis.
If Geno Smith is somehow available, he should be the clear cut #1 option in my eyes. I think Geno is incredibly underrated. That "unbelievable" pressure Darnold couldn't handle against the Rams, Geno faces that every week regardless of opponent. Put Geno behind an OL, and I think he could be a Goff level player. He's a top-10 QB in my eyes.

I'll also still stand by Justin Fields being an underrated option. After an initial honeymoon period with Russ, I think the Steelers offense wasn't any better with Wilson than it was with Fields. Fields went 4-2 as a starter. Wilson went 6-5. Fields has improved every season and is still only 26. I think he is the best "value" of the FA group.
 
who knows. It would make a lot more sense for the Vikings to go with JJM on his rookie deal. That’s the dream for most franchises - win with a cheap QB under contract, and spend to build around him.
This is repeated ad nauseam but the reality is that since 2000 only six Super Bowl winning QBs were on their rookie contracts

  1. Tom Brady
  2. Ben Roethlisberger
  3. Eli Manning
  4. Joe Flacco
  5. Russell Wilson
  6. Patrick Mahomes
25% of all super bowl wins were rookie qb contracts. I'd say that's not bad.
 
I’ll take Geno on the Jets. Sign me up. I don’t want Darnold.

Personal preference. I’m not sold on Darnold’s 6.5/10ths of a year.
 
Regarding JJM:
Vikings coach Kevin O’Connell said J.J. McCarthy (knee) has resumed on-field training.
McCarthy was off to an impressive start in the preseason before a torn meniscus sidelined him for his rookie campaign. The No. 10 overall pick in this year’s draft is now back on the field and appears to be doing well with his recovery despite undergoing a second surgery on his knee in mid-November. The Vikings have a lot to figure out at quarterback after Sam Darnold broke out for 4319-35-12 in his lone season with the team and would be due a big contract. Of course, there is always the franchise tag. McCarthy is a near lock to serve as the Vikings’ starter in 2025 if Darnold plays elsewhere, but if the team re-ups with the late-career breakout quarterback, McCarthy’s 2025 prospects become far more uncertain.
 
I'm surprised people can't agree he cost himself money with the last two games. Unless you argue he never had a chance at top-QB money, he certainly lost some financial leverage.

I think a lot teams will see Darnold as an underrated guy who can excel on a good team. People used to just see him as a bust, so this is an improvement. But how many QB-needy teams are good? Is he a guy you can build around, and take a bad team and make them good? Or do you already need the pieces in place?

I don't think any team will pay him $40 million a year on a long-term deal, but good performances against Detroit and LA, and maybe the next game, would have put him in that position. His best bet is the franchise tag. So if he gets that, he didn't cost himself money in 2025, but almost certainly did going forward.

Two things can be true at the same time: Sam Darnold is much better than the league gave hm credit for, and he hasn't shown enough to be worth a long-term, top-QB deal.
 
At some point you have to tip your cap to the job the Rams defense did.
The Rams did a really nice job actually.

they did a lot of disguising of what they were doing. they made it look like they were blitzing from one side, and backed them into coverage a couple times.

then boom, they did it again but this time they backed into coverage and a corner from the other side of the field would blitz and darnold (looking at the other side) didnt see him til it was too late. Beautiful play design.

when you see enough of this it can throw you off as a QB.

what you need to remember is....
1) this was not something you saw a lot of on tape during the regular season from the Rams.
2) Not a lot of teams have the ability to play D like this consistently. you require a certain amount of talent, and pass rush ability from multiple players. most teams are lucky if they have 2 players who can really get after the QB.
3) the team didnt do a great job of picking up the blitz when it did come.

I'm not laying all of this at the feet of Darnold. certainly he gets some of the blame, but I'd not be pointing the finger for him on all of this. the coaching staff, and the team as a whole was also not well enough prepared for what they saw last week.
 
I'm surprised people can't agree he cost himself money with the last two games. Unless you argue he never had a chance at top-QB money, he certainly lost some financial leverage.

I think a lot teams will see Darnold as an underrated guy who can excel on a good team. People used to just see him as a bust, so this is an improvement. But how many QB-needy teams are good? Is he a guy you can build around, and take a bad team and make them good? Or do you already need the pieces in place?

I don't think any team will pay him $40 million a year on a long-term deal, but good performances against Detroit and LA, and maybe the next game, would have put him in that position. His best bet is the franchise tag. So if he gets that, he didn't cost himself money in 2025, but almost certainly did going forward.

Two things can be true at the same time: Sam Darnold is much better than the league gave hm credit for, and he hasn't shown enough to be worth a long-term, top-QB deal.
I think there's no doubt it cost him money, the debate is how much. For the most part I'm guessing they had formed their opinions on him so I think his value fell some but maybe not as much as some others are speculating. But performing poorly in those games showed his play got worse when it counted most. If he had come out and played lights out and led his teams to win and maybe got the Vikes to the Super Bowl his value would have increased some but still think ceiling was capped.
 
I think there's no doubt it cost him money, the debate is how much. For the most part I'm guessing they had formed their opinions on him so I think his value fell some but maybe not as much as some others are speculating. But performing poorly in those games showed his play got worse when it counted most. If he had come out and played lights out and led his teams to win and maybe got the Vikes to the Super Bowl his value would have increased some but still think ceiling was capped.
I don't think that's any different than people thought going into the season though. In fact, it's significantly greater than was expected of him going into the season. The expectation was that he'd lose his job by week 7, after the BYE. This was widely discussed, and emphasized after JJM looked good in the preseason. If you told Vikings fans that they'd be a playoff team & win 14 games, they would have laughed in your face.

So the reality is that no one was going to sign Darnold to a "top QB deal" regardless of whether he flamed out in round 1, or in the NFC-D, NFC-C, or in the SB. He led a team to 14 wins, and put up convincing numbers doing it. That's what will set his market value.

He had a good year. That raised his floor. He's going to get a 3 year deal, or get franchised/traded then sign a 3-year deal. That's why I don't believe it cost him a substantial amount of money. Maybe he would have gotten more guaranteed. Maybe not. It was 1 good season. He showed he can QB a good offense. I don't believe any team or scout was waiting for his post-season performance to decide whether he'd become a hot commodity on the open market. I seriously doubt anyone was going to give him a 5-year deal, even if he went to the SB, which I don't believe anyone actually thought he had a chance to do. I certainly didn't have him getting past the Lions. I thought he had a good chance against the Rams, but they showed up incredibly prepared. They went to school with DET's last game & had a week off to rest up for it.

I agree with Greg Cosell - there are maybe 3 or 4 QB in the league who could have overcome what the Rams threw at him. The Vikes OL was no match for it, and the Vikes OC certainly didn't make adjustments. He was battered and rattled - he certainly didn't play his best football. Absolutely no argument there. But people seem to love bashing Darnold, instead of crediting the Rams. It's a team sport. Between coverage and a relentless blitz, they owned the Vikings offense.

But he is arguably the top FA QB in a year with a bad QB class. He's going to get paid. That's really the long and short of it. I have no idea how anyone could know if he actually lost money or how much from those last 2 games. I know it's a popular narrative here, but respectfully, I'll take Cosell's word over FBG sharks. He's certainly studied more than we have, seeing as that's his job and he's been doing it for a long time. He specifically said that there was a lot more to see on the all-22 than one could divine from watching the game on television, and he didn't believe Darnold cost himself a penny based on market conditions & his regular season performance.

The article posted above seems to agree that it's a seller's market, so regardless of Darnold's last 2 games, he will be the one setting the price. All that matters is that a team is willing to meet it. And I'd about guarantee someone will. And if it's more than 1, he could even get more than expected.

The fact is that despite his poor play the last 2 weeks, he wasn't carried to 4300/35/12 - he achieved that. He had a 102.5 QBR, which includes that last game against the Lions. Sure he had good WRs and a good coach, but that's the body of work. Whether you or I believe it's replicable isn't really relevant. All that matter is that an NFL franchise believes it.
 
At some point you have to tip your cap to the job the Rams defense did.
The Rams did a really nice job actually.

they did a lot of disguising of what they were doing. they made it look like they were blitzing from one side, and backed them into coverage a couple times.

then boom, they did it again but this time they backed into coverage and a corner from the other side of the field would blitz and darnold (looking at the other side) didnt see him til it was too late. Beautiful play design.

when you see enough of this it can throw you off as a QB.

what you need to remember is....
1) this was not something you saw a lot of on tape during the regular season from the Rams.
2) Not a lot of teams have the ability to play D like this consistently. you require a certain amount of talent, and pass rush ability from multiple players. most teams are lucky if they have 2 players who can really get after the QB.
3) the team didnt do a great job of picking up the blitz when it did come.

I'm not laying all of this at the feet of Darnold. certainly he gets some of the blame, but I'd not be pointing the finger for him on all of this. the coaching staff, and the team as a whole was also not well enough prepared for what they saw last week.
Another factor was how good Stafford was. He'd looked like garbage for weeks coming into that game, then got a week off. He came out and played efficiently, leading his team on long drives, keeping that LAR defense rested the entire game.

Can't be overstated how much credit the Rams should get for winning that game and in the manner they did. It's not as fun as bashing Darnold, but it's the truth.
 
If I were the Vikings, I would be extremely nervous going into 25 with a rookie and Danny Dimes (potentially) as my QB room
Absolutely. OTOH it’s a leap a franchise needs to take and either be right or wrong. It really does the franchise no good to be two years into JJM without knowing if he’s an answer.

JMHO, Vikes should only keep Darnold at a discount. Even then, only to take live bullets behind a gelling new OL the first half season. Darnold will probably have a better $ option, but who knows what talent and coaching he’d have. Daniel Jones is a better QB2 than Vikes have had in a long time.
 
I think there's no doubt it cost him money, the debate is how much. For the most part I'm guessing they had formed their opinions on him so I think his value fell some but maybe not as much as some others are speculating. But performing poorly in those games showed his play got worse when it counted most. If he had come out and played lights out and led his teams to win and maybe got the Vikes to the Super Bowl his value would have increased some but still think ceiling was capped.
I don't think that's any different than people thought going into the season though. In fact, it's significantly greater than was expected of him going into the season. The expectation was that he'd lose his job by week 7, after the BYE. This was widely discussed, and emphasized after JJM looked good in the preseason. If you told Vikings fans that they'd be a playoff team & win 14 games, they would have laughed in your face.

So the reality is that no one was going to sign Darnold to a "top QB deal" regardless of whether he flamed out in round 1, or in the NFC-D, NFC-C, or in the SB. He led a team to 14 wins, and put up convincing numbers doing it. That's what will set his market value.

He had a good year. That raised his floor. He's going to get a 3 year deal, or get franchised/traded then sign a 3-year deal. That's why I don't believe it cost him a substantial amount of money. Maybe he would have gotten more guaranteed. Maybe not. It was 1 good season. He showed he can QB a good offense. I don't believe any team or scout was waiting for his post-season performance to decide whether he'd become a hot commodity on the open market. I seriously doubt anyone was going to give him a 5-year deal, even if he went to the SB, which I don't believe anyone actually thought he had a chance to do. I certainly didn't have him getting past the Lions. I thought he had a good chance against the Rams, but they showed up incredibly prepared. They went to school with DET's last game & had a week off to rest up for it.

I agree with Greg Cosell - there are maybe 3 or 4 QB in the league who could have overcome what the Rams threw at him. The Vikes OL was no match for it, and the Vikes OC certainly didn't make adjustments. He was battered and rattled - he certainly didn't play his best football. Absolutely no argument there. But people seem to love bashing Darnold, instead of crediting the Rams. It's a team sport. Between coverage and a relentless blitz, they owned the Vikings offense.

But he is arguably the top FA QB in a year with a bad QB class. He's going to get paid. That's really the long and short of it. I have no idea how anyone could know if he actually lost money or how much from those last 2 games. I know it's a popular narrative here, but respectfully, I'll take Cosell's word over FBG sharks. He's certainly studied more than we have, seeing as that's his job and he's been doing it for a long time. He specifically said that there was a lot more to see on the all-22 than one could divine from watching the game on television, and he didn't believe Darnold cost himself a penny based on market conditions & his regular season performance.

The article posted above seems to agree that it's a seller's market, so regardless of Darnold's last 2 games, he will be the one setting the price. All that matters is that a team is willing to meet it. And I'd about guarantee someone will. And if it's more than 1, he could even get more than expected.

The fact is that despite his poor play the last 2 weeks, he wasn't carried to 4300/35/12 - he achieved that. He had a 102.5 QBR, which includes that last game against the Lions. Sure he had good WRs and a good coach, but that's the body of work. Whether you or I believe it's replicable isn't really relevant. All that matter is that an NFL franchise believes it.
Agree with much of what you wrote, still think his value has gone done a bit over last two weeks, but Darnold will be setting the price? Not sure if you thought that through that but that statement is a bit out there.
 
but Darnold will be setting the price? Not sure if you thought that through that but that statement is a bit out there.
It’s pretty much what the agent in that link above is saying.

There’s a market rate for QBs like him. It’s the “baker mayfield” type deal. That’s the 3rd or 4th article I’ve read that suggests that as his range. That’s Darnold setting the price. He’s going to expect something in that range.

Why would that be “out there”? It’s basically what the football talking heads are saying.

Now add to that the rarity of available QB, and that he may have more than 1 suitor.

Seems pretty boilerplate.
 
Has it dawned on anybody yet that Jones might be looking to be a starter in the league and that somebody will likely pay him to do it? This isn’t the sort of thing where it’s Darnold or Jones. It’s McCarthy for sure and then maybe (at most) one of the other guys if they can convince one of the other guys to turn down a payday.
 
It’s pretty much what the agent in that link above is saying.

Not really. That article said he would have gotten Jordan Love money if he went deep in the playoffs. As it is, he gets Baker money. I can’t cut-and-paste for some reason but it’s a prominent statement in the very first part and meat of the article. Says Darnold likely would have gotten $50M and forced the team to think about trading McCarthy, but now it’s Baker Mayfield-type money and the agent isn’t sure Darnold is going to get his asking price, which is exactly what Mitchie is saying.

The article even concludes, “Having a target or asking price is one thing. Getting a team to meet contract demands is another. It remains to be seen whether the two will be one for Darnold.”

In short, he’s not naming his price according to that article.
 
In short, he’s not naming his price according to that article.
All I meant by naming his price is that he & his agent will have a number in mind & Teams will have to meet it.

I never in a million years would expect him to get Love money after 1 season, much less a season where the expectation was that he’d be a disposable backup, relegated to the bench behind JJM after 6 weeks.
 
Has it dawned on anybody yet that Jones might be looking to be a starter in the league and that somebody will likely pay him to do it? This isn’t the sort of thing where it’s Darnold or Jones. It’s McCarthy for sure and then maybe (at most) one of the other guys if they can convince one of the other guys to turn down a payday.
I fully expect Danny 10-pennies to want to start somewhere.

I think his market will be a little stiffer than Darnold’s, but he gets a little benefit of the doubt for
1. Being on some baaaaad Giants teams
2. Having some evidence of competence/improvement over his career.

Now, I, personally, don’t believe he’s improved. Like, at all. Sure, he’s fumbled a lot less. But having watched a lot of his play, it just doesn’t look to me that he’s evolved at all as a passer (though he continues to impress me with his legs from time to time).

I don’t think that’ll be extremely valuable on the open market, but like Darnold, all it’ll take is one team to take a chance on him.

He’s probably where Darnold was last year in terms of getting a new gig. I could see a scenario where he stays in MIN as the presumptive starter “until JJM is ready” which could be 0 games or it could be 5-10. Depends on whether that pays better than whatever options he might have. He could see that as a more likely chance of getting starts.

Jones is a tricky one to evaluate.
 
Fair enough. But that’s almost every contract everywhere. When somebody says “they named their price,” I’m generally thinking little to no negotiation and a whopper of a deal. We could just be using terms of art differently. I sort of understand the article the way Mitchie sees it.

Me reading the article that particular way is not because I’m a Darnold basher (though I am one). I readily admit the guy says he would have earned “Jordan Love money,” which I would never give Darnold as a GM. No way. And, in fact, I’m not sure Jordan Love deserves Jordan Love money after watching the Pack in fits and starts this year.

But I don’t think my prejudice is coloring my reading is what I’m saying. I’m trying to be critical of my own interpretative powers and maybe I just read the article differently, I guess. Or use the term differently than you do.
 
Fair enough. But that’s almost every contract everywhere. When somebody says “they named their price,” I’m generally thinking little to no negotiation and a whopper of a deal.
That was me in the heyday of working in IT.

I’d go to interviews in the mid-90s in flip flops and cargo shorts & kick my feet up on the ping pong table I was interviewing at. There just weren’t enough workers for the jobs out there. It was glorious.
 
Honestly, I think you covered it.
Yeah, but I’m not a GM.

There could well be someone out there who sees the Danny Dimes cup as half full.

That said, IIRC when he was drafted people thought the Giants were insane for taking him where they did. Maybe I’m misremembering.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top