“I’m Outraged. I’m Sickened. I’m Saddened.”

That was the tone heard across national sports media following the Browns’ latest preseason game. Shadur Sanders, despite his relentless work ethic, was thrust into a situation that many analysts now call a trap.

He entered the game surrounded by third- and fourth-string players — guys who won’t even make the 53-man roster. Instead of designing quick, rhythm plays to help Sanders succeed, the Browns rolled out regular offensive calls, leaving him behind a line that couldn’t protect him.

The result was predictable: sacks, broken plays, and criticism aimed directly at the rookie quarterback.

But here’s the problem — according to analysts like Stephen A. Smith, this wasn’t an accident. It was the plan.

Stephen A. Smith: “This Was a Setup From the Start”

From the moment Shadur took the field in his very first preseason game, Smith said it felt staged:

“Shadur starting that opening game was a setup for failure. The Browns wanted him to fail. They wanted the narrative reinforced that he was just a fifth-round pick.”

Instead of nurturing his development, Smith argues, the Browns structured the preseason to undermine Sanders’ rise, ensuring critics could point and say, “See? He’s not ready.”

Garrett Bush: “He Was Never Their Priority”

Local analyst Garrett Bush echoed the sentiment, noting Shadur’s work ethic stood in stark contrast to how little priority the Browns placed on him.

Bush described Sanders as the first to arrive at practice and the last to leave, grinding for hours to earn his spot. Yet when game day came, that dedication meant nothing.

“At practice, Shadur Sanders was not their priority. No matter what he did, they weren’t going to give him the fair shot he earned.”

It wasn’t a lack of effort. It was systemic neglect.

Stefanski’s Defense Falls Flat

When questioned about his handling of Sanders, Stefanski doubled down. He insisted the rookie’s struggles were simply part of “development” — dismissing suggestions that playing him with lower-tier teammates sabotaged his chances.

But critics weren’t convinced.

Analysts argued that real development means giving a quarterback meaningful reps, not tossing him into a doomed setup. Throwing Sanders behind players destined for the practice squad wasn’t coaching — it was burying potential under bad optics.

Skip Bayless: “The Worst Possible Approach”

Skip Bayless, never shy to stir the pot, called out the Browns for what he deemed “the worst possible approach” to handling a young quarterback.

In Bayless’ view, this wasn’t just mismanagement — it was a pattern of mishandling Sanders from day one. By consistently denying him first-team reps, then throwing him into unwinnable situations, the Browns created a self-fulfilling prophecy: “proof” that he wasn’t ready, when in reality, they’d rigged the deck.

Ochocinco: “Even Tom Brady Would Have Struggled”

Former star receiver Chad “Ochocinco” Johnson added his perspective. Putting Sanders on the field with players who weren’t going to make the roster, he argued, meant failure was inevitable.

“Even if you had Tom Brady in that situation, he would’ve looked bad. You can’t succeed when the people around you aren’t NFL-level.”

Johnson predicted critics would seize the moment, painting Sanders as a bust while ignoring the real issue: the system he was forced into.

Sanders’ Silence and Accountability

Through it all, Shadur Sanders has said nothing negative about his coaches, teammates, or the organization. Instead, he’s taken full responsibility.

“All those sacks — they’re on me. There were places I could’ve gotten my eyes in better spots, gotten through progressions quicker. Regardless of anything, they’re on me.”

That response, analysts note, shows a maturity beyond his years. Instead of shifting blame, he’s embracing growth. Instead of pointing fingers, he’s focusing on improvement.

But the question looms: how long can he keep taking the blame for situations designed to make him fail?

A Larger Pattern of Bias?

This controversy isn’t just about one game. It reflects a troubling pattern across the NFL, especially with quarterbacks who don’t fit the league’s preferred mold.

Lack of support in practice. Sanders has consistently been denied first-team reps.

Stacked odds in preseason. Placed behind weak lines, with unfamiliar systems, he’s set up to struggle.

Media narrative games. Analysts frame him as “fifth-round talent,” reinforcing a label tied not to his play, but to draft-day politics.

It feels less like development and more like a calculated effort to control the narrative around him.

Analysts Rally Behind Sanders

What’s different this time is that the media isn’t letting it slide. From ESPN to FS1, commentators are uniting in criticism of how Sanders has been handled.

Stephen A. calls it a setup.

Skip calls it mismanagement.

Garrett Bush calls it negligence.

Ochocinco calls it sabotage.

Each analyst points back to the same conclusion: this isn’t about Sanders’ ability. It’s about an organization afraid of his rise — and willing to undercut him to prove their point.

Resilience Amid the Fire

Despite the chaos, Sanders’ response has won him respect. He’s shown humility, grit, and determination to learn from every setback. Fans and analysts alike are beginning to frame him not as a failure, but as a symbol — of how young players can be mistreated, and how resilience can turn setups into comebacks.

His refusal to lash out, even under unfair treatment, has shifted the narrative in his favor. Critics who once doubted him are now questioning the system instead.

The Bigger Question

How many more athletes have been “developed” this way — handed impossible odds, then labeled busts when they predictably failed? How often do promising players get buried, not because of their talent, but because of politics, ego, or bias within coaching staffs?

Shadur’s case shines a light on a broader issue: fairness in opportunity. It’s not just about whether one quarterback thrives. It’s about whether the system itself is designed to let players truly succeed.

Conclusion: Who’s Really Responsible?

Shadur Sanders took the blame for every sack, every mistake, every failure. But more and more analysts are asking whether that responsibility actually lies elsewhere — with the Browns, with Kevin Stefanski, and with a league that too often sets players up for headlines instead of success.

Sanders’ resilience is clear. His talent is undeniable. But until the system changes, the question remains: when will players like him finally get a fair shot?