The Jets made it official Thursday that they are moving on from Aaron Rodgers in 2025.

I know what you are thinking, Vikings fans, because I'm thinking it as well.

This is history repeating itself, a grotesque yet beautiful destiny hurtling like an asteroid toward the Land of 10,000 Lakes.

Brett Favre built a Hall of Fame career in Green Bay; things got messy in the end; he went to the Jets in a move that didn't work out for either side; and then he pivoted to the Vikings in the ultimate revenge plot.

Rodgers built a Hall of Fame career in Green Bay; things got messy in the end; he went to the Jets in a move that didn't work out for either side; and ... stop.

I have been wondering and worrying about this moment for years, sometimes treating it as an absurd (or even welcomed) inevitability that Rodgers would spend his final NFL days with the Vikings and other times dismissing it as impossible.

Now that it's here, I feel strangely ambivalent but mostly firm in this: Making a move for Rodgers just doesn't make sense for the Vikings.

They are on an ascending arc. I've talked on the Daily Delivery podcast and written that they should eschew shortcuts.

Here is the logic and how this situation in 2025 is different from the one the Vikings encountered in 2009 when they eventually signed Favre:

  • The 2008 Vikings went 10-6 despite an uninspiring QB situation that flip-flopped between young QB Tarvaris Jackson and veteran Gus Frerotte. They had a great defense and rightfully surmised in 2009 that they were a QB away from true contention. Hence their monthslong pursuit of Favre. The 2024 Vikings were the opposite, getting a career year out of Sam Darnold. The Vikings in 2025 have two viable QB options (sign Darnold or give the keys to second-year QB J.J. McCarthy). Before Favre arrived in 2009, they had none.
  • Favre's 2008 season with the Jets was actually pretty good until he tried to play through a thumb injury, turning an 8-3 start into a 9-7 finish. Rodgers, by contrast, looked physically diminished in 2024. In 2009, Favre still had something left in the tank, while it's questionable how much Rodgers has in 2025.
  • Favre was a commanding presence in any locker room or huddle, but mostly in a good way. Rodgers, by contrast, has proved to be an ego-driven distraction in recent years. If culture is as important as Kevin O'Connell says it is, bringing in Rodgers would be a tough sell.

Even given all that, if this exact scenario were playing out a year ago when McCarthy was a rookie and before Darnold had signed, bringing in Rodgers (especially if he were willing to play on a discounted deal) might have been tempting.

As it is now? It doesn't make sense.

I'm glad we talked that through, as much for me as for you.