Jump to content

Vikings sign Sam Darnold


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, JDBrocks said:

I just don’t think having a QB that costs 3-4x what McCarthy does aligns with what they are trying to do with the roster. It’s a good and interesting problem to have.

True but if Darnold keeps performing this well, would be odd to cut ties with him instantly and just assume McCarthy can do exactly what he can next year.  All depends on how well they do but really what were the chances the Vikings would be 3-0 right now?  Considering them playing the 49ers and Texans in those first three games, I would assume that probability was extremely low!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, vike daddy said:

Darnold will presumably want a multi year contract though. you want to let McCarthy sit for another three years...?

That's the biggest challenge to attempting to resign Darnold. If he continues to play well, I think we'd definitely be willing to offer him another 1 year contract, but locking him in for 3+ years is putting McCarthy in a bad situation. Maybe there's a middle ground.. I don't know?

Edited by Worm Guts
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Darnold drives this team to 11 or 13 wins, and looks like he's contributing to it rather than just being along for the ride, and this team makes a good playoff run, I don't think you can simply let him walk for nothing. First, the locker room is going to rally around a guy who helps them win. Second, the Vikings have shortchanged themselves for this year's draft. If you can pick up a 2nd round pick (or a first round pick if we're really lucky), how can you say no to that? Third, McCarthy is a sunk cost at that point and really shouldn't be a concern as to whether we want Darnold back or not. 

The Vikings will have enough cap room to keep Darnold and improve in free agency. Other than Darnold reverting back to being a bad quarterback, I don't foresee a scenario where the Vikings simply let him walk away for nothing. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we let it play out and see how he performs over the full season first before speculating.  Yes, he's done well thus far, but we've also seen him make several dumb decisions during each of these games that fortunately didn't turn out bad through pure luck.  I personally think the 3-0 start has more to do with the defense than it does with Darnold, but we'll have to see how that plays out over the season.  If he continues to play like he has thus far, I'm still letting him walk.  He's played well, but I don't think he's done anything really that McCarthy couldn't do a year from now...and for less cost. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, swede700 said:

I think we let it play out and see how he performs over the full season first before speculating.  Yes, he's done well thus far, but we've also seen him make several dumb decisions during each of these games that fortunately didn't turn out bad through pure luck.  I personally think the 3-0 start has more to do with the defense than it does with Darnold, but we'll have to see how that plays out over the season.  If he continues to play like he has thus far, I'm still letting him walk.  He's played well, but I don't think he's done anything really that McCarthy couldn't do a year from now...and for less cost. 

This is where I'm at, and where I imagine Kwesi/KOC are, too. McCarthy was catching up to Darnold in camp, and while he probably wouldn't have caught him to start the season, I have no doubt that the long term focus of the organization is holistically investing in JJ.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wcblack34 said:

 Third, McCarthy is a sunk cost at that point and really shouldn't be a concern as to whether we want Darnold back or not. 

I don't buy this at all, and don't think that the FO thinks this way either. It will absolutely be a part of the equation, and a significant one at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, PrplChilPill said:

If he's great, yes. We have zero idea if McCarthy can play. Zero. 

While you and I might have zero idea, I think they have a pretty good idea. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean the team hasn't.

Quote

"As our fans either have already come to find out or will in the future, this guy is so motivated and so dialed in," O'Connell said. "As excited as I was to draft him, he's confirmed everything that I hoped to see. Our fan base and everyone should be excited about the fact that we've got our young franchise quarterback in the building."

https://www.si.com/nfl/vikings/news/kevin-oconnell-on-jj-mccarthy-weve-got-our-franchise-quarterback-01j590sfwsr8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PrplChilPill said:

He's played half a pre season game. Practice and games are not the same. My guess is they'll move on, and sign a random old veteran and roll with JJ and win less games. 

No one said they are the same. What I'm saying is that I trust what the coach and players and front office have said all offseason. It was their intention to start Darnold this season and move on to JJ next season, regardless of the injury. Darnold playing well was likely expected, given how this team has evaluated and adapted to scenarios, I find it hard to believe that this wasn't something that they've considered and planned for.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...