As the NFL’s salary landscape continues to skyrocket, there are certain statistics that leave even the most seasoned fans shaking their heads in disbelief. One such statistic is that Kirk Cousins, the veteran quarterback for the Minnesota Vikings, is set to make more money in the 2025 season than Joe Montana earned throughout his entire legendary career.
Yes, you read that right — in one season, Cousins will earn more than the man many consider to be one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time did during his entire playing career. The disparity between the two contracts is staggering, and it serves as a striking reminder of just how much the game and the economics surrounding it have changed over the years.
First, let’s put things in perspective. Joe Montana’s illustrious NFL career spanned from 1979 to 1994. During that time, he earned a total of approximately $25 million in salary, an amount that is impressive for its time but hardly extraordinary when compared to today’s astronomical salaries. Montana played in an era where salary caps were much lower, and the overall revenues generated by the NFL were a fraction of what they are today. Even adjusted for inflation, Montana’s total earnings over his career would be equivalent to roughly $60 million, which is far below what many of today’s quarterbacks earn in just a few years, if not a single season.
Kirk Cousins, on the other hand, is poised to earn a significant sum in the 2025 season. According to reports, Cousins is expected to make a staggering amount — more than $40 million in base salary alone. This doesn’t even include potential bonuses or endorsements, which would push his total earnings even higher. While Cousins is a solid quarterback, he has not won a Super Bowl or reached the same legendary status as Montana. Yet, his salary in 2025 will surpass the cumulative earnings of one of the NFL’s most iconic players.
To be fair, times have changed drastically since Montana’s era. The NFL is now a multibillion-dollar business, and television contracts, sponsorship deals, and overall revenue streams have grown exponentially. The salary cap — which determines how much teams can spend on player contracts — has grown significantly over the years, allowing teams to allocate more money to their star players. As a result, quarterbacks, who are considered the most important players on the field, now command record-breaking salaries. Additionally, endorsements, media exposure, and the general economic landscape of the sports industry have played a massive role in these rising figures.
However, the stark contrast between Montana’s career earnings and Cousins’ single-season salary does raise some fascinating questions about how the NFL — and sports in general — has evolved over time. Is this financial shift a sign of progress? Or does it point to the changing nature of how we value athletes today versus decades ago?
For many, Montana’s career is the epitome of what it means to be a quarterback: winning four Super Bowls, making countless clutch plays, and leading teams to success year after year. His legacy is built on his performances in some of the most memorable games in NFL history. On the other hand, Kirk Cousins, while respected as a reliable quarterback, has not had the same level of success on the grand stage, never making it past the NFC Championship and often criticized for his lack of postseason success.
Yet, here we are, in 2025, where Cousins’ paycheck eclipses the earnings of a player whose name is synonymous with NFL greatness. It’s a remarkable reflection of how far the league has come — and how the economics of professional sports continue to evolve at an unprecedented rate.
At the end of the day, it’s clear that player salaries are a product of the times they play in. While Joe Montana’s legacy will forever be cemented in the history of the NFL, it’s a testament to the current landscape that a quarterback like Cousins can make more in one season than Montana did in his entire career. Whether it’s viewed as a sign of inflation, progress, or simply the changing tides of sports economics, it’s undeniably an eye-popping reality.