The Indianapolis Colts made it clear earlier this year that they were looking to bring in another quarterback to compete with Anthony Richardson for the QB1 position, and this week, Minnesota Vikings backup quarterback Daniel Jones was signed for just that reason.
Jones and Richardson both seem to welcome the idea of competing for the starting job, some analysts are indicating that the very notion of needing Jones is not a good sign - and that even if Jones succeeds, that's not the best thing for the Colts.
At the IndyStar, Joel Erickson didn't seem overly impressed with the Jones signing.
"Jones is far from perfect competition for Richardson. The former Giants quarterback played his way out of a four-year, $160 million deal in less than two years in New York, has a history of injury and has not produced big plays as a passer despite being much more accurate than Richardson."Joel Erickson
PFF.com likewise rated this deal as below average.
"The Colts are making Jones one of the highest-paid backups in the NFL, potentially signaling an open competition with the struggling Anthony Richardson. While Jones isn’t a high-end starting option, he has earned a 70.0-plus PFF grade in each of the last four seasons in which he played at least 350 snaps. Still, this move feels like an overpay by Indianapolis."Pro Football Focus
But the harshest take came from ESPN's Ben Solak, who said it signals a much bigger issue for the Colts - particularly if Richardson fails. "[O]n paper, square deal," he began. "The Colts can give Richardson another chance at putting it all together and get the first crack at post-Giants Jones. Two bets instead of one at the quarterback position is good business for a team in need of a starter."
Yet he also argued that there are more systemic issues at hand that are setting both quarterbacks up to fail.
"But how much success can a team draw from a QB room of Richardson and Jones when it doesn't have a dominant WR1 and when two starting offensive linemen just left in free agency? Sure, the ceiling on Richardson is high enough to see a glimmer of hope, but that's what the Colts have been hanging their hat on for two years. How likely is Richardson to hit that ceiling? And how likely is Jones to have a 2025 season at the level of, say, Sam Darnold's 2024? The Colts are making some long, long bets at the position."Ben Solak
He concluded that signing Jones is in and of itself a bad sign of just how dysfunctional the Colts organization has become.
"[I]t's objectively a wise move to get Jones in the building to compete with Richardson. But the very fact that it is a wise move to add Jones highlights how dire of a situation the Colts franchise is in. If snagging Jones from the Vikings is a big sigh of relief, then your franchise is in a bad way. What happens next? Jones goes 4-4 as a starter in the back half of the season and the Colts are in the same position again in 2026, trying desperately to sign another low-end QB1 in free agency to save jobs for another year?" he wrote.
"Even if this move is a wise one, it still tells me storm clouds are gathering on the horizon in Indianapolis."