The air in Berea hums with that familiar Cleveland tension—a cocktail of hope and history, where every quarterback decision feels weighted with the ghosts of Kosar, Sipe, and countless ’almosts.’ It’s a feeling Browns fans know intimately: the ache of potential hovering just beyond reach, like a Hail Mary hanging in the Lake Erie wind.

ESPN’s Dan Orlovsky, the analyst who once infamously scrambled out of an end zone but now dissects offenses with surgical precision, dropped a truth bomb that’s ricocheting around the Dawg Pound: “I do not think all four should have the chance to start. If I was Cleveland, I would be doing everything I could to have Dillon Gabriel or Shedeur Sanders as my starting quarterback.”

His reasoning cuts through the usual coach-speak fog: veterans Joe Flacco (nearly 41) and Kenny Pickett (a 15 TD/14 INT career stat line screaming “ceiling reached”) offer fleeting stability at best, but zero clarity on the future. Starting them, Orlovsky argues, is simply “wasting time.”

The early OTA lineup order whispered its own subtle truth: Pickett first, then Flacco, Gabriel, then Sanders. It was a snapshot of initial trust—veterans anchoring the present, rookies pressing close behind. Yet, as camp unfolds, that narrative is shifting. Gabriel, the NCAA’s all-time leading passer (18,722 yds, 155 TDs across 63 starts!), isn’t just waiting his turn. He’s operating with the calm efficiency of a seasoned point guard, his left-handed release snapping through drills.

Coaches note his rapid grasp of Kevin Stefanski’s system—a blend of play-action deception and timing routes demanding sharp mental processing. Think of him like a high-IQ Madden franchise-mode rookie whose ratings steadily climb because he just gets the playbook.

Then there’s Shedeur Sanders: electric, polarizing, and undeniably gifted. His OTAs were a masterclass in efficiency: 77.3 % completion rate, 9 TDs, just 1 INT – numbers that pop off the sheet like a perfectly thrown deep ball. Orlovsky sees him as “custom-made” for Stefanski’s scheme, praising his innate feel for “under-center, play-action… the way he thinks the game.” The potential is tantalizing – a Heisman-finalist arm (4,134 yds, 37 TDs in ’24) with pinpoint accuracy. But Sanders’s path hit a pothole, actually, two.

Maturity check: The Sanders setback

Clocked at 91 mph in a 65-zone, then 101 in a 60 this June, GM Andrew Berry didn’t mince words: “Not smart. Just not smart… We’ve addressed it with him. Look, he understands the implications… It’s not just about yourself. It’s not just about having a joyride, but that you could injure other people.” Berry’s public rebuke was a stark reminder: talent gets you drafted (even in the 5th round after a surprising slide), but maturity keeps you on the field. It’s pushed Sanders firmly behind Gabriel in the early camp rep hierarchy, battling for QB3, not QB1.

This is Stefanski’s high-stakes calculus. Does he play it safe with Flacco’s steady hand (career 84.4 rating) or Pickett’s known (but limited) upside? Or does he embrace the exhilarating, terrifying unknown of Gabriel’s polished readiness or Sanders’s raw, high-ceiling talent?

The safe choice offers temporary shelter. The bold choice? It could finally unveil the long-term answer Cleveland has craved for decades—or plunge them back into the quarterback abyss.

The Dawg Pound’s roar isn’t just noise; it’s a heartbeat. And right now, it’s pounding for something new. Starting Gabriel or Sanders isn’t just about Week 1. It’s about planting a flag in the future, trusting the draft evaluation, and discovering if one of these rookies can truly be the signal-caller who finally turns Cleveland’s perennial ’almost’ into a resounding, sustained ’yes.’

The veterans represent the known path. The rookies? They represent the hope that the path can finally lead somewhere different. Somewhere better. The decision isn’t just about who takes the snap. It’s about who gets to steer the ship.