Analysis Summary:

The article's core claim that Shedeur Sanders' draft position was lower than expected is supported by multiple sources. However, the claim that it "baffled" analysts and general managers is subjective and difficult to verify definitively. The article exhibits moderate bias through its framing and selective reporting, focusing on the "dramatic fall" narrative.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim:** "Shedeur Sanders’ dramatic fall to Day 3 of the NFL draft baffled fans, analysts and some general managers and coaches."
  • Verification Source #1: Suggests surprise at Sanders not being picked earlier.
  • Verification Source #2: Mentions Sanders remaining undrafted after round 3.
  • Verification Source #3: Mentions Sanders falling to day 3.
  • Verification Source #5: States fans and experts were surprised he wasn't picked in round 1.
• Analysis: The claim that Sanders fell to Day 3 is supported by multiple sources. The "baffled" part is subjective, but the sources do indicate surprise.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• Agreement:** Multiple sources (Verification Source #2, Verification Source #3, Verification Source #5) confirm that Shedeur Sanders was not drafted as early as some expected.
• Agreement:** Verification Source #1 and Verification Source #5 suggest surprise or bafflement at Sanders' draft position.
• Lack of Coverage:** None of the sources explicitly confirm that general managers and coaches were "baffled," although it's implied by the surprise expressed by analysts and fans.