I did feel that Baker would've (eventually) been able to get it done.
You are far more objective than most of the other Baker fans who post a lot. So, I want to ask you in particular a few questions.
Do you really believe that if the NFL believed in Baker that no team would have been willing to give up more than what Carolina gave up? Do you really believe the idea being floated around that the Browns had no leverage? You don't believe that a team would have pursued him w/more gusto if they really thought he could get it done?
I was hoping oober would answer my questions because while he is a Baker fan, he is also objective. And I was curious to see his thoughts.
My takes:
1. The Browns would have never moved on from Baker had they believed that he could get it done. Why spend all those draft picks and money on a guy w/all the baggage that comes w/Watson if you believe the guy in your building can "get it done?"
2. If NFL teams believed that Baker could get it done, they would have traded for him.
3. The idea that the Browns had no leverage is absurd to me. I don't see how anyone who is rational can even think such a thing. What leverage did the Texans have? What leverage did the Eagles have w/Wentz? If teams viewed Baker as a guy they thought they could win the Super Bowl with, they would have fought each other to trade for him. If Joe Burrow demanded a trade today, would the other NFL teams not try to trade for him because the Bengals wouldn't have any leverage? Justin Herbert? Lamar? Josh Allen? I could go on and on and on........but the "no leverage" angle is ludicrous. Teams will spend huge resources in QBs they believe can "get it done" no matter if a team has leverage or not.
