At the beginning of the offseason, Saints general manager Mickey Loomis said the team would take a more aggressive approach in free agency. Many brushed off the statement, since similar claims are common across the league. But the Saints actually followed through — clearing significant cap space, making multiple additions, and even pursuing some high-profile moves that ultimately didn’t pan out.
They brought in new talent and re-signed several key players, putting together a roster that looks a bit stronger and deeper than last year’s version. Still, not every decision has been met with praise. In fact, one analyst believes the Saints made one of the offseason’s biggest mistakes.
In a recent Bleacher Report article, Gary Davenport ranked the eight worst free-agent signings of 2025 — and he placed the Saints’ decision to re-sign Chase Young to a three-year contract at No. 3 on the list.
Bleacher Report names Saints’ re-signing of Chase Young one of the worst moves of the offseason
New Orleans re-signed Young to a three-year contract with $33 million guaranteed, a move Davenport criticized as puzzling. He argued the Saints were paying based on Young’s potential rather than his current performance.
“The Saints are paying Young like he’s already rebounded. Like he’s a 10-sack edge-rusher capable of wreaking havoc on a weekly basis.
And while Young is still just 25, overpaying a player based on potential we haven’t really seen in years (at least not consistently) makes no sense for a Saints team with holes galore and too many bloated contracts already on the roster.”
Many Saints fans share that sentiment following Young’s first season with the team. Although he played all 17 games, the veteran defensive end managed just 5.5 sacks and 21 tackles, including eight for loss.
He did tally 34 total pressures, sparking debate among fans—some saw it as a sign of solid impact on opposing quarterbacks, while others were frustrated he didn’t turn more of those pressures into sacks.
Still, the Saints clearly valued those pressures enough to commit to him long-term. At just 26 years old, Young has time to prove the deal was a smart investment—but that remains to be seen.
Be the first to comment