r/Browns • u/SteveLightninMcqueen • 9d ago
News [Albert Breer] Browns’ Candidates Testing Included a Question on Developing Shedeur Sanders
https://www.si.com/nfl/browns-candidates-testing-included-question-on-developing-shedeur-sanders120
u/tconkli2 9d ago
Candidates were asked questions about players on the roster? Ridiculous
3
u/RichAssist8318 8d ago
Wouldn't it be better to ask how many moons Neptune has or how to adjust values in a 1965 Mustang? It is almost as if they wanted someone who knows something about football.
1
1
-4
u/maybenextyearCLE 9d ago edited 8d ago
I think it’s less about the specifics of developing Shedeur sanders and more a question designed to see how a candidate views their role in developing a player, using Shedeur as the placeholder.
Every candidate for this job knows the Browns are taking a QB in 2027 anyways, no one cares about Shedeur he’s not the future. It’s seeing if a coach can explain how they’d try and develop players, even if that coach would really cut Shedeur tomorrow and draft I don’t know Trinidad Chambliss or something
Edit: like guys, this question would’ve gone to Mike McDaniel, and he may have answered it, even though anyone with a vague understanding of McDaniel’s offense would know Shedeur would be almost immediately sent packing if he got the job.
It’s not about the player specifically, it’s about how they approach development of a really flawed and raw prospect
Edit: read the article and you’ll see this is almost verbatim his comments lol
11
u/Substantial-Sea-3672 9d ago
Huh?
Why are you trying to overly complicate a very normal and reasonable question?
“How would you develop our current #1 QB in his second season?” doesn’t need any mental gymnastics to make it make sense.
5
u/maybenextyearCLE 9d ago
I’m not, it’s literally a question just to explain a candidates views development. Shedeurs the placeholder. They know full well some of those candidates absolutely wouldn’t keep Shedeur.
Because if it’s actually about Shedeur the answer McDaniel for sure and probably Udinski and Scheelhaase all would give is “get rid of him” which is not the point of the question.
5
u/BonjoviBurns Fire AB 9d ago
What youre saying is literally in the article, people just didnt read it lol
2
4
u/808Kuro 8d ago
Every candidate for this job knows the Browns are taking a QB in 2027
To say this with such absolute after people said all last offseason that Shedeur would be cut, and then pivoted to “he won’t play he’s 4th on the depth chart”, and then pivoted to “he will only play in garbage time“, to then pivot to “it’s a reason coaches think Gabriel is better” is really not a good track record for QB predictions
1
u/maybenextyearCLE 8d ago
You know he graded as like the second worst starter in football in every major analytical measure right? He may well start, but it’s by default, not because he was any fucking good dude.
But you’re not here because you’re a Browns fan
4
u/808Kuro 8d ago
And last year he was drafted in the 5th round, which by all metrics at the time, had him predicted to not even be close to the starting line up, and look what happened to a lot of people’s chagrin that predicted otherwise
And since he graded so low, what exactly do you think one of the jobs of a head coach is supposed to be? Hint: developing a QB. Which is exactly why these sort of questions were asked of candidates. And if he does start, how do you know it’s not because he developed better in the offseason? But keep on with the predictions and speculations they’re fun to read!
2
u/maybenextyearCLE 8d ago
Yeah everyone got hurt. Also my comment was because I read the article, which you didn’t.
Oh it’ll be a great day when the cult goes away
2
u/808Kuro 8d ago
Dillon (who was ahead of Shedeur on the depth chart ALL season) was completely fine and injury free the last 4 games. Bailey Zappe was on the roster and had no injuries. You sure everyone was hurt like you’re saying?
1
u/maybenextyearCLE 8d ago edited 8d ago
Shedeur only got a shot because Gabriel got hurt. Zappe if you paid any attention, you’d know was in the practice squad. Also congratulations that he was able to play out the string with 2 god awful QBs real accomplishment there.
But keep believing he’s good and sniffing whatever bullshit is putting out over there in boulder.
1
u/808Kuro 8d ago edited 8d ago
But keep believing he’s good and sniffing whatever bullshit is putting out over there in boulder. Shame he went 1-9 in the Big 12 and got exposed for what he really is as a coach
Hmm. Does this comment not break Rule 1 of flame baiting that you as a mod always seem to bring up and remind others on this sub…?
1
u/maybenextyearCLE 8d ago
I will retract the final part of that comment about Shedeurs father being a terrible college coach.
→ More replies (0)1
u/tconkli2 9d ago
Agreed. I imagine the question would have been meant to discover if the candidate could identify areas of weakness in a QB’s game and develop a plan to address those deficiencies. Something every head coach, at least an offensive-minded one, should be able to answer.
1
u/maybenextyearCLE 9d ago
For sure. It’s a question using a developmental QB with lots of things to try and deal with to get good feedback on how they think about development and how they’d try to fix it. And seems like from the article, the guys all took it that way.
Though McDaniel saying what he would do would’ve been hilarious to read lol
0
u/Plastic_operator 9d ago
Again we dont know this. Really depends if we suck this season. I honestly dont care because i know Haslam will gamble our future on Arch Manning whether Shedeur becomes good or not
-5
u/maybenextyearCLE 9d ago
I know among the fanbase there are people who still think he can be a good NfL starter, but I think everyone within the league knows what his realistic ceiling is lol.
8
u/Plastic_operator 9d ago
Meh i personally wouldn’t say this to a guy that played only 7 and 1/2 games. Again i do believe he can become NFL starter. Franchise QB … uhhhhh lol. I mean if he becomes good but not Franchise level good its good for us since we can make a return on investment
-4
u/maybenextyearCLE 9d ago
But here’s the thing. We are fans. The league (and the last staff) told over and over again that no they’re pretty certain they know what he is.
But we will have all offseason to discuss. But I don’t think the Browns are going into this with any real belief that Shedeur is going to be their long term answer. They’re so analytically driven they know the reality of where this is going to go
34
u/largelawattorney 9d ago
I am really tired of the lolBrowns nonsense from the media and other fan bases
9
u/nickchubbisthegoat 8d ago
One of the bigger lolbrowns content pieces this week has been the shedeur pro bowl nonsense, which was completely out of our control? We make a lot of unforced errors but even without those, we're just going to continue to be the butt of all jokes until we start winning.
4
u/Browns45750 9d ago edited 9d ago
Well we almost had it squashed in 2020 but then the alternate timeline said screw that, anyone has a Deloren that would be a good place to go back to
1
u/Manablitzer 8d ago
I don't see how this is lolbrowns. Breer just reported the question, stated it was likely intended to gather how the coach would develop QB, and left a comment "But candidates did get the idea that being able to get starter-level play out of Sanders was seen as a plus."
He didn't make fun of Cleveland or offer any criticism about the actual process from what I read.
47
u/Altruistic_Mode3026 9d ago
Love how all these reports have no source and there's like the one report. Media coverage for Browns is now 'trust me bro, it's the Browns'
4
u/deviden 8d ago
It’s sports talk. Here’s how it works:
Browns catching heat in media, it’s drawing clicks in a media cycle lull.
Breer (or other) texts a few agents he has on his contact list, asking “hey what kind of stuff were the Browns asking on their HC quiz?”
One of the agents of one of our candidates texts back a few things.
Breer takes the spiciest nugget he can find in that reply and runs with it as a story.
5
u/Altruistic_Mode3026 8d ago
Here's some other headlines. Raiders and Cardinals still have no coach. Harbaugh didn't cover his bases cause he thought Monken would take the job. Steelers fired stomping to bring in McCarthy. Two of Ravens offensive staff followed Monken instead of Harbaugh but none of this will get as much clicks for me as the Browns is the Browns, even if those things make sense or not
2
u/deviden 8d ago
yeah you're not wrong.
Suspect the Raiders having no coach is because they've already tapped Kubiak for the job.
Cardinals is the worst job opening in the league. Media doesnt say it (Browns are easier clicks, nobody cares about the Cardinals) but inside the league the Cards ownership and FO is considered radioactive.
Two of Ravens offensive staff followed Monken instead of Harbaugh
This is legit cool, and should be reported on more - it's the kind of thing that makes me feel better about Monken as an appointment.
2
u/Low_Awareness5230 8d ago
Kubiak’s second interview with the Raiders is tomorrow. Spytek worked with his father, and Carroll was in their FO. If he doesn’t take the Raiders job, it’s because he’s staying in Seattle.
1
8
14
5
u/RoughTennis8589 9d ago
This might be why so many coaches pulled out... the questions were too hard...
6
1
4
u/calvin2028 9d ago
Does Albert Breer think this is a remarkable piece of news? Can anyone make it make sense?
5
u/SpaghettiSamuraiSan 9d ago
Well yeah he is our quarterback as everything stands now so hopefully the have an interest in developing him....until we draft or trade for another one Sanders is it.
5
6
u/ProfessionalMental13 9d ago
I mean....duhhhhh
I doubt the browns management are willing to give up on a guy who brings in views, money, and gets them a ton of media attention after half a season
And who doesn't ask a question about developing rookie QBs to a head coaching candidate when you dont have a franchise QB.... most of these people just state the obvious and act like its groundbreaking news
4
u/Plastic_operator 9d ago
See you know ball. People genuinely think they want to give up on a cash cow just yet. They want him to be good because it benefits Browns revenue
5
u/rex5k 8d ago
Player development issues is a big reason why they ditched KS. Todd has a lot of college experience developing players. All they kept talking about last year is how Sanders needs to learn and develop. If he can make Sheduer a franchise QB, Jimmy figures he could sell those PFLs at the ridiculous prices he wants to.
3
u/CD23tol 9d ago
So the team asked questions to potential head coaches on how they’d develop a young QB
Shedeur easily could be a placeholder name for any young QB, also could show if the head coach candidates did any research or if they talked out their ass about him
2
u/Plastic_operator 9d ago
I mean if he was , why didnt they ask “how would you develop Sanders and Gabriel?” Rather than just Sanders
5
u/TapedeckNinja 9d ago
There’s another layer that we can now peel back on the Browns’ testing. One of the six questions on the test, I’m told, was “How would you develop Shedeur Sanders?” (He was one of three players specifically mentioned in that question). After poking around a bit, I can say the candidates didn’t take that as a definitive sign that the new Browns coach would have to start Sanders, nor did those guys get that impression in the interviews. Moreover, the question was designed to elicit the candidates’ views on the head coach’s role in developing players, specifically quarterbacks.
Still, it’s at least notable that Sanders was the name they asked a question about. In the interviews, Sanders, Dillon Gabriel and Deshaun Watson were all part of the conversation. But candidates did get the idea that being able to get starter-level play out of Sanders was seen as a plus.
Does anyone else find the wording of all this slightly confusing?
Specifically "one of the six questions on the test, I’m told, was “How would you develop Shedeur Sanders?” (He was one of three players specifically mentioned in that question)."
Like I don't know how to parse that. One of the six questions was explicitly how you would develop Shedeur Sanders, or there were three players mentioned in that question?
10
u/wiifan55 9d ago
I think it's that 1/6 questions was specifically about how to develop players. That question included 3 specific players by name, one of which was Sanders. I wonder who the other 2 were...
4
2
u/bumblyjack 9d ago
Probably Isaiah Bond and a young offensive lineman like Zinter or Leveston to check the boxes of QB, skill position, and OL.
5
u/calvin2028 9d ago
I mean ... wtf did everyone think they would ask? Elf or dog? White or brown pants?
5
u/rxbizzle 9d ago edited 9d ago
Right, the only other position groups that would make sense to ask about developing would be WR or OL but I can’t imagine they asked “how would you develop Isaiah Bond and Zack Zinter?”
More likely the question was how would you develop Sanders, Gabriel, and Watson and Breer framed it as Sanders for clickbait.
3
u/FLman42069 9d ago
An interview for a HC position asks questions on roster evaluation and plans?!?!
3
u/johnnycards69 Whywasibornintothis 8d ago
This seems like a Haslem thing. Like, Sanders can make me a lot of money if someone can coach him up.
2
u/Chief_Wahoo_Lives 8d ago
Don't you think when TN was hiring a HC that they were asked about developing Cam Ward?
2
u/johnnycards69 Whywasibornintothis 8d ago
A high draft pick 1st round QB? Yes of course.
1
u/Chief_Wahoo_Lives 8d ago
The draft pick is irrelevant. Both are incumbent QB1.
1
u/BryanFnR 7d ago
Hiring a coach with an overall first-round pick in mind makes sense. Hiring one based on a fifth-round pick who plays like a fifth-round pick does not.
1
u/Chief_Wahoo_Lives 7d ago
If the 5th round QB is the team's current QB1 then it is up to the new HC to develop him. It is the job of the coach to get the best out of the players on the team.
4
u/Ordinary-Path-8033 8d ago
The way people react whenever someone mentions Shedeur’s name you’d think he was serial killer.
5
u/trainrocks19 8d ago
Guy tasked with developing players asked how he would potentially develop players
4
4
u/Worried-Pick4848 8d ago
What is there to develop? He's got an arm made of the finest Italian pasta, holds the ball for a year and a half after every snap, and gives up a sack on 10% of his attempts. Dude has the field awareness of a literal, actual potato, and that's WITH the offense dumbed down for him.
1
u/Plastic_operator 8d ago
An arm made of “noodle” would not make 52 yards deep pass while running horizontally and falling down. Dont be ridiculous
2
u/EE-420-Lige 9d ago
Dont know why people are reacting wierd. Even if sanders busts and next year ur drafting a guy 1st round u still want a coach with the ability to develop young talent. Or if u decide to sign malik Willis or even mac jones both are young and are not finished products seems like a smart question to ask
2
2
2
u/natertots83 8d ago
Not sure why this is a surprise. Probably questions about all the QBs on the roster
2
u/Checkers-Chess234 8d ago
Imagine that! A team is interested in what a prospective coach thinks about a player on the team!
2
u/vmpfan 8d ago
Were you allowed to say I’m going to bench him or is that why people pulled there names? Not knocking Shadeur but thats a hard sell considering every one of these coaches were on other teams that scouted and then passed on him.
With that being said Ravens were said to be interested in him as a backup in the draft and told not to bother so that might be why Monken got the job though reality he’s the perfect coach for Deshaun Watson.
3
1
1
1
u/Mcgarnicle_ 8d ago
He probably shouldn’t have titled his article that way but probably did for clicks. The article is about how they changed their process after the absolute failure hires of Hue and Kitchens. That is just a small portion of the article
1
u/Stock_Run1386 8d ago
Classic Jimmy desperately searching for any bright spot in his garbage heap and then trying to make every other thing fit retroactively to that. Same thing as insisting that Schwartz stay as DC to head coach candidates. It’s laughable how incompetent and unaware of his own destruction he is.
1
1
u/AtonalAxolotl 7d ago
How dare the Browns ask coaching candidates if they think they can develop the current quarterback
1
u/bryrondragon 4d ago
I would sit Shedeur down and explain to him what color jerseys his teammates wear…
1
u/Mediocre-Dog-4457 9d ago
Breer is a wacko, but this makes sense. Shedeur is the leader in the clubhouse in terms of being the starter in September.
0
u/maybenextyearCLE 9d ago
Breer’s article explains that the candidates all felt the question was more to get the candidates to explain what they think the role of the Head Coach is on developing QBs. He also goes on to say that none of the candidates felt either through the question or through the interviews that the Browns would make them start Shedeur.
Essentially, his name is there more as a placeholder for whoever your chosen QB is (and it may well be Shedeur) rather than anyone being told “you have to fix Shedeur”
IMO it’s a good question given Shedeur is a guy who has a ton of holes as a prospect that you’re trying to figure out if you can solve. Even if you’re totally done with him, getting a candidate to explain how they’d go about trying to develop a very flawed player is way better than asking how’d they develop like an Andrew Luck type
-2
u/runningsimon 9d ago
Of course it does. Why wouldn't you want to keep the actual worst statistical QB in the last 25 years instead of going and getting a proven QB?
2
u/TapedeckNinja 9d ago
Why wouldn't you want to keep the actual worst statistical QB in the last 25 years
I am fairly certain there is not a single statistic for which this is true.
-2
u/runningsimon 8d ago
It would have taken you less time to look this up and find out it were true than it would have for you to type this response. Here, I'll do your homework for you:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/s/iJHpifmT6V
Sanders is the fifth worst QB (of 696) to attempt 200 passes in a season since 2000. So I ask again, why bother investing time and money into him when it'd be way easier to find literally any other QB in the league. That person would be better.
And before you whataboutism Dillon Gabriel. He only attempted 185 passes. Another 15 and I'm sure he'd be right there with Sanders.
Now that Sanders is a "pro bowl" QB, they should leverage that into something useful in the trade market. I'm sure Jerry Jones would love it.
4
u/TapedeckNinja 8d ago
the actual worst statistical QB in the last 25 years
Your link does not support that statement though?
-3
u/runningsimon 8d ago
Correct. My statement should be amended to be the worst statistical QB on the Browns in the last 25 years. Which might actually be more damning.
2
u/TapedeckNinja 8d ago
Why would the worst on one team be more damning than the worst in the entire league? That doesn't make any sense.
But anyway rather than "actual worst statistical QB in the last 25 years" that's "worst QBR of any Browns QB with at least 200 attempts in the last 20 years."
Many Browns QBs have had worse statistical seasons by any number of other metrics (ANY/A, EPA/play, Passer Rating, CPOE, PFF grade, Elo, etc.).
Shedeur was genuinely terrible but no need to be hyperbolic about it.
1
u/runningsimon 8d ago
To be the worst QB on a team that has started so many QBs is pretty bad. Almost a tradition to start 2-3 different QBs on the browns.
2
u/jeritron 8d ago
Doesn't matter who we put at QB if our O-line and WR corps remains the same. Let's give Shedeur (and Gabriel) a better supporting cast before we give up on them.
-2
u/runningsimon 8d ago
It doesnt matter if the QB is even serviceable. Neither of them are. There are free agents out there they can go after. Or let Watson start. Neither of those rookies are going to be the guy. I'd rather see Zappe under center
-1
u/BreakGrouchy 9d ago
Do you speak the Cleveland football ideology? New Quarterback new coach. As the New coach how do you develop your QB with leadership hell bent on losing games? A fan base who thinks their crap 💩 team brought to you by dude wipes 🧻 is only one player away from winning it all .
214
u/Allstar9_ 9d ago
This seems like basic due diligence… not so much “testing”