clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

The Baker Debate

New, comments

Our friends at The Jets Blog think the team made the right move dropping Chris Baker.

 

In the wake of the Jets’ recent personnel moves, a common question that seems to be troubling Jets fans is this: Why did they cut Chris Baker in the first place? Some have even gone so far as to criticize the front office for not retaining his services.

However, I am not here to opine on that same thought. Instead, I will be demonstrating why the Jets not only did the right thing in releasing Baker, but that it was, in fact, kind of a no-brainer.

Bent goes on to make a number of good points about the financial implications, his productivity, and his role. I agree with a lot of what he has to say. I don't think the issue is with cutting Baker. It's more what the team did afterwards to address the position, namely nothing. Most fans would be fine with a less distinguished but cheaper option provided such an option could block well and at least keep defenses honest as a pass catching threat. Now that Bubba Franks is gone, nobody is proven to fill that role. In a vacuum, I think there's argument Baker would be too expensive as a backup. Given what's taken place, a lot of fans are stuck wondering why the team didn't just keep Chris if there was no Plan B.