NFL executives split on Colts' controversial Daniel Jones decisions

Some around the NFL have criticized Indianapolis Colts general manager Chris Ballard for using the transition tag to retain quarterback Daniel Jones before the Colts and Jones agreed to a two-year, $88M deal that could be worth up to $100M in March. 

For a piece published on Thursday, Mike Sando of The Athletic spoke with NFL executives about moves made throughout the offseason. Those executives seemed somewhat split regarding the Colts' handling of the Jones situation. 

Did Colts have to be all-in on keeping Daniel Jones? 

"I think they did the right thing with him," one executive said about how the Colts held onto Jones. "They couldn’t afford not to have him."

That executive added that the Colts' "troubles all started" when they made quarterback Anthony Richardson Sr. the fourth overall pick of the 2023 NFL Draft. Richardson may go down as one of the biggest busts in franchise history, and the Colts seemingly can't get anything of value for his services this spring. 

However, a different executive mentioned that Jones "wasn’t going anywhere without checking with" the Colts first. That executive speculated that Jones wasn't interested in signing with the New York Jets. While Jones had a cup-of-coffee stint with the Minnesota Vikings late in the 2024 season, the second executive said "the Vikings had no ability to sign" a high-priced quarterback in March. Minnesota instead signed Kyler Murray to a team-friendly one-year contract.

Why Colts couldn't let Daniel Jones test the open market

Ballard and Colts owner Carlie Irsay-Gordon sound confident that Jones will build upon what he achieved last season when he went 8-2 across his first 10 starts. While Jones suffered a torn Achilles in December, he seems to believe he'll be back in the lineup for Indianapolis' regular-season opener this coming September. 

"There are worlds where they don’t tag [Jones], he gets paid elsewhere and it would have been hard to find someone to fill that gap," a different executive said about how things could have gone wrong for the Colts. "This was the smart play if you are banking on him continuing to thrive in Year 2 of your system. By the same token, I do not know if it pushes the needle."

Those running the Colts clearly felt no obvious upgrade over Jones was available to the club via free agency, a trade or the upcoming draft. Even if he proves to be a flop, Indianapolis isn't married to him on a long-term basis.