The Cleveland Browns have found themselves at the intersection of some of the major areas that draw attention in the NFL. “Hot seat” head coach and GM, quarterback controversy/need, a popular backup QB
and a big-name player, all rolled into one.
QB Shedeur Sanders earned a second start for the Browns in Week 13. Much like his debut start, there are a few details that could benefit Sanderse and Cleveland with the San Francisco 49ers this week
. The key is whether or not Sanders will be good or just better than the poor play of Dillon Gabriel.If the Browns starter in Week 12 were almost any other player with any other name, we probably wouldn’t have as much coverage, both on DBN and nationally. ESPN’s Ben Solak led his weekly column breaking down everything related to Sanders’ starting debut. There are a lot of great details worth reading, but Solak does a great job simplifying the good here:
It’s hard to call Sanders’ debut start good, but I wouldn’t necessarily call it bad, either. I’ve watched plenty of late-drafted quarterbacks see the field in the past decade or so, and a few of those games have deeply offended me. (Looking at you, 2017 Nathan Peterman.) Sanders’ game didn’t.
Sanders did more than enough to earn further starts for a 3-8 Browns team that is deploying a historic amount of rookies and clearly building for the future.
Obviously, Solak is not heaping praise on Sanders here. Previously, Solak noted the great play to WR Isaiah Bond:
The throw to Bond was a real peanut. Sanders was at his best in college throwing on the move to his right, a vantage point where sees the field well and takes aggressive shots, even at the expense of being hit. With only five Browns truly in protection here, Sanders is responsible for buying time against the extra rusher. The Raiders are playing Cover 0 behind the blitz, so Bond is running to wide-open space so long as he beats his man off the line. Sanders makes the first rusher miss and uncorks a beautiful throw on the move.
Solak wasn’t focused only on the positives, however, noting the same concerns many had with Sanders coming out of college:
This throw serves as a reminder that even in those predraft moments when we believed Sanders was a first-round quarterback, he was so despite athletic limitations. He is not particularly fast, big, physical, loose or strong-armed. Belief in his pro projection was predicated on intangibles — toughness, poise, vision, creativity — and those were all on display against the Raiders. But he’s fighting an uphill battle against dimensions and physics.
Simplifying Solak’s above statements: With the two key parts of playing the QB position, Sanders has the mental and is limited in the physical. Besides overcoming his draft status (which unfortunately often matters in the NFL), Sanders much overcome his physical limitations by his timing being “impeccable.”
For now, Cleveland’s defense is so good that Sanders doesn’t have to be perfect (or “impeccable”) to help the team win. To remain the Browns starter beyond this season, mental perfection is the requirement, given the physical limitations noted by Solak and others.
Do you think Solak’s evaluation of Sanders was fair, too positive or too negative?
Share your thoughts in the comment section below
