Inside the Browns’ Quarterback Question: What Skip Bayless (and Cleveland Radio) Are Saying About Shedeur Sanders

CLEVELAND — The Browns finally got their victory Monday. But the buzz that followed wasn’t just about the scoreboard; it was about the quarterback depth chart—and the rookie who didn’t take a snap.

During a recent segment reacting to Cleveland’s blowout win over Miami, commentator Skip Bayless weighed in with a pointed take on the Browns’ handling of Shedeur Sanders. Bayless suggested head coach Kevin Stefanski “wants no part of” the rookie, claiming Stefanski doesn’t like how Sanders carries himself on and off the field. That claim—aired as opinion, not reporting—landed with a thud in a fan base already parsing every snap between Dylan Gabriel and Sanders.

Stefanski has not publicly said any such thing, and it’s worth underlining: Bayless was offering commentary. Still, the idea found fertile ground because of a series of on-field decisions that are hard to ignore.

The Dolphins Game That Turned Up the Volume

Cleveland led Miami 31–6 with roughly four and a half minutes to play. Conventional wisdom says that’s the moment to empty the bench and get your backup quarterback live reps—especially when that backup is a rookie you hope to evaluate. Instead, the Browns left Gabriel in to close it out.

That choice raised eyebrows. If Gabriel is the starter and the game is salted away, why risk him? And if Shedeur Sanders is your No. 2—he’d been elevated on the depth chart—why not give him a low-stress series against a struggling Dolphins defense? Even those inclined to defend the move (for instance, treating it as a ceremonial first NFL win for Gabriel) were left shrugging. Starters like Quinshon Judkins were still on the field with 25 carries already logged. If the goal is caution, it wasn’t consistently applied.

The result: a small in-game decision turned into a big week-long talking point.

What Cleveland Radio Is Hearing

Local radio added fuel. On ESPN Cleveland, host Tony Rizzo relayed that one source at the stadium believed Sanders will start the final four games of the season “no matter what,” while another suggested an even earlier timeline is possible. The logic tracks with how quarterback evaluations typically unfold on teams with elite defenses and questions under center: if you can win with complementary football now, you still need to know whether your rookie can elevate you later.

There’s also the Gabriel factor. He’s been steady and careful, but not exactly takeover-mode. Against Miami, Cleveland hung 31 points while Gabriel completed 13 passes for 116 yards—a tidy box score that suggests a defense-and-ground-game victory more than a quarterback showcase. You can win that way for stretches; it’s harder to build a long-term identity on it. If the Browns think their ceiling requires a playmaker, they need data on Sanders sooner rather than later.

The Quarterback Controversy You Can’t Tiptoe Around

Some in town floated another reason for keeping Sanders on the sideline late: avoid a quarterback controversy. The theory goes that if Sanders marched the offense down for a quick touchdown in garbage time, the calls to start him would become deafening.

But quarterback controversies aren’t like thunderstorms—you can’t just “not look” and hope they pass. They’re a byproduct of uncertainty and upside. If the Browns truly believe Gabriel is the guy, a mop-up touchdown shouldn’t rattle them. If they aren’t sure, then insulating the depth chart from fan noise delays the inevitable. Either way, the best answer is the oldest one in football: put it on tape.

Sorting Signal from Noise in the Bayless Blast

Back to Bayless. The claim that Stefanski “doesn’t like” Sanders is impossible to verify from the outside and, to be candid, doesn’t align neatly with how NFL personnel decisions typically work. Coaches don’t have to “like” a rookie’s social-media presence to give him reps when game state, development, and roster construction all point in that direction. What is clear is that Stefanski has, so far, prioritized a low-variance profile with Gabriel—lean on defense, keep the ball secure, ride Judkins, avoid the big mistake.

You can argue with the aesthetics or the ceiling, but there’s a coherent football case for it. There’s also a coherent case for pivoting to Sanders: a higher-variance, higher-ceiling option who could unlock explosive plays and stress defenses in ways Cleveland hasn’t consistently done.

Both can be true at once, and that’s exactly why the decision is so fraught.

What Comes Next

If the reporting chatter is right, a late-season runway for Sanders is coming unless Gabriel forces the issue with a string of high-level performances and wins. That approach would give the staff a controlled sample: a few starts, a few two-minute drills, some third-and-longs when teams have real film on him. It would also tell the front office whether to build around Sanders this offseason—or keep the search alive.

In the meantime, the Browns should avoid sending mixed messages. If the goal is development, find snaps for Sanders when game flow allows. If the goal is to ride a conservative template to January, embrace it openly and accept the scrutiny that comes with keeping a popular rookie on ice.

The Bottom Line

Bayless’s commentary is just that—commentary—but it resonated because of Cleveland’s recent choices.
Gabriel has been competent within a defense-first blueprint, not catalytic.
Sanders represents upside the Browns will eventually need to measure, whether in spot duty or a multi-game audition.

Cleveland doesn’t have to pick a franchise quarterback today. It does have to pick a lane. And in a season where the defense can carry them, there may never be a better moment to find out exactly what Shedeur Sanders can do.