CLEVELAND, Ohio — Browns fans greeted rookie quarterback Shedeur Sanders like the franchise’s savior on Sunday afternoon.
Fans raised their wrists to match Sanders’ signature celebration as he jogged onto the field. And the crowd popped after his first career completion (which gained five yards).
But the more Sanders dropped back, back, back to pass — still dropping — on Sunday, the more Baltimore’s pressure revealed what coach Kevin Stefanski has been hinting at for months.
Sanders wasn’t ready to play yet, no matter how ready fans felt to see him.
Do you see now why Sanders has been sitting? ‘Cause during Cleveland’s 23-16 loss to the Ravens, he personified his biggest pre-draft nitpick. In six second-half drives, Sanders completed 4-of-16 passes for 47 yards. He took two sacks that cost Cleveland 27 yards. And he cost the Browns 10 more on an intentional grounding penalty caused (again) by Ravens pressure and Sanders’ scrambling ambitions.
If this sounds familiar, then you’ve probably read the “weaknesses” section on Sanders’ scouting report by draft expert Dane Brugler:
Needlessly backpedals, drifts and takes extra hitches in pocket (possible scar tissue from playing behind bad line)
Holds ball excessively long and put too many “you can’t take that sack!” plays on tape
Ability to buy time in pocket will become much more difficult versus NFL speed
Sanders led the nation in sacks taken as a senior at Colorado, and before you mention his college offensive line (which was bad) or other senior-year statistics (which were impressive), understand this: Sacks kill drives, and they don’t all fall on bad blocking.
The Washington Postfound in 2023 that, due in part to safer passing tendencies, sacks started surpassing interceptions as the most harmful play an offense could commit. And in Seth Wickersham’s recent book on quarterbacks, Broncos coach Sean Payton correlated college sack totals with processing speed.
“If a quarterback is sacked quite a bit in college, per drop back, you can improve that some,” Payton says in the book. “But it generally means the processing is a little delayed.”
Translation: Sanders entered the league needing developmental seasoning, as we saw during Sunday’s loss.
I harbor no joy in harshing the energy created when he first jogged onto the field with 12:43 to play in Sunday’s third quarter. The rookie proved himself likeable again after Sunday’s loss by asking fans to tone down their criticism of fellow rookie Dillon Gabriel. I think Sanders’ critics mistake his confidence for arrogance. And I’ve always believed that, eventually, he would earn the chance to start games for this team.
But when Sanders was thrust into action Sunday, he played worse than Gabriel. Yes, he did. Sanders threw for 21 fewer yards than Gabriel despite throwing six more passes. Sanders took more sacks (two) and committed more turnovers (one). Neither player led a touchdown drive, but Sanders made more mistakes.
It’s OK to admit that, just like it’s OK to ask the Browns why, according to Sanders, he hadn’t thrown a live pass to top receiver Jerry Jeudy until he targeted Jeudy on Sunday.
Of course, the Browns share blame for Sanders’ shortcomings against Baltimore. They buried him on the depth chart — behind two veteran quarterbacks who were both traded by Week 6 — during training camp. They gave him zero first-team practice reps after naming their No. 2 quarterback over a month ago. They assembled the receiving corps that forced Sanders to wait longer for someone to come open and the offensive line that allowed so much Ravens pressure on Sunday.
“We didn’t go a good enough job period, as a team and certainly as an offense in there,” Stefanski said when asked how Sanders managed pressure. “So, we’ll make sure that we get back to work.”
This franchise deserves all your scrutiny when it comes to developing quarterbacks.
But in this case, with this player, I think the Browns knew Sanders’ skill set better than we did. I think they understood that this roster accentuated his biggest weaknesses. And I think they knew that playing him too soon helped neither the franchise nor the player.
If the Browns played Sanders before they were forced to on Sunday, then … what? His receivers beat coverage more often? The tackles block better in front of a quarterback who hunts big plays? No.
In fact, I’d argue that Sanders would have eaten more hits than his predecessor. He would take more sacks, which would kill more drives, which would hurt Sanders’ confidence (if also increase the Browns’ viewership numbers).
Who does that serve besides the fans who held their wrists up on Sunday?
I’m sorry. I like the guy, too. I think he could develop into a starter one day. But when Sanders dropped back, back, back to pass against Baltimore, he showed us what the Browns have been hinting at all season.
He wasn’t ready yet. And he needs more time to develop into the player his fans want him to be.
Football Insider newsletter free trial: Take a minute and sign up for a free trial of our Football Insider newsletter, featuring exclusive content from cleveland.com's Browns reporters.
If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.