Dawgs By Nature
The Cleveland Browns and quarterbacks have been a toxic mess for the better part of the past 30 years.
Which is why it is somewhat understandable when people get confused over what constitutes good quarterback play and, most importantly, what the goal should be when it comes to the quarterback position.
Sunday’s game against the Las Vegas Raiders, where rookie Shedeur Sanders made his first NFL start, is the latest example.
While there are many people taking victory laps this morning over what they perceive as a legendary debut, the reality is that for a first game, Sanders was … acceptable. There were certainly nice moments – the long completions to Isaiah Bond and Jerry Jeudy, along with the situational awareness to throw a one-yard pass to Dylan Sampson, knowing he would take it an additional 65 yards for a touchdown.
But Sanders only completed 55 percent of his passes, did not really get the wide receivers involved (a major complaint for the past several weeks, but one that has suddenly quieted), the offense was a dismal 3-of-12 on third downs, and outside of the three big plays, had just 113 total yards on 45 offensive plays.
According to Mike Sando at The Athletic, the Browns finished the game with a -12.1 EPA on offense. Sanders’ EPA was -4.5, which is worse than what Cleveland quarterback legends Charlie Frye (+14.3), Cody Kessler (+0.8), DeShone Kizer (-0.4), Connor Shaw (-2), and Luke McCown (-3.1) put up in their debut starts.
Was that really all that different from what Dillon Gabriel was doing as the starter for the previous six games?
And that brings us to the important question when it comes to quarterback play and the Browns:
Is the goal simply to be better than the guy everyone hates? Or is the goal to actually have a difference-maker at quarterback? (Hint: there is only one right answer.)
It has only been one game, but Sunday’s performance had strong vibes of Jameis Winston 2.0, which no one should want to see.
But Winston was considered “fun” by a large portion of the fan base and media, so no one cared that the offense did not improve. He wasn’t Watson; he was “good in front of a microphone,” he did goofy things, so that was good enough. Even though none of it equated to the most important part, which is winning games.
Simply being the same, or not substantially worse than Gabriel, a player that many detested from the moment the Browns drafted him, is OK for a game or two, but that cannot be acceptable over the long haul.
Winning is always better than losing, especially after three consecutive weeks of dreary and frustrating football from the Browns. And there was no reason for the team to switch...
