That's the whole problem.
Just because you like something doesn't mean it's a good idea.
D&D is hindered by people liking inherently flawed ideas and offering no solutions to fix the problems that keep cropping up.
On the other hand, to be fair, that goes both ways. The Fighter's paradigm worked very well for many years, because there wasn't much to compare it to.
You had (mostly) the highest hit points, best attack bonus, more attacks, could use the best weapons and armor, best save progression, and had the least need for high ability scores (but had access to a secret bonus round if you did have high scores!).
You were the first in, first out, guy, and you did the bulk of the work in defeating encounters. Skills? We roll ability checks for that (save for that darned Thief).
When Non-Weapon Proficiencies became a thing, that weakened the Fighter, but not by much, since nobody got a lot of these (unless you used the option for trading languages for bonus slots). And even then, the Fighter had some neat things to do with Weapon Proficiencies.
Then 3e got a new generation into the game and they noticed things like "hey, why do monsters have to engage the Fighter anyways? Why don't they just murder the Cleric?"
The game designers said "well, we thought about that, so you can invest in cool tricks like spiked chains and improved trip!".
And DM's said "that's silly. also, ranged attacks!"
And spellcasters, with a few of their restrictions removed, said "man, spells are really good."
And Fighters said "well, we have tricks!"
And WotC said "yeah, but tricks can't be GOOD, because you get so many of them. So we'll gate the halfway decent ones behind 3 cruddy tricks, since you get so many anyways, it's no problem, right?"
Fighters found themselves having to plan out builds, put more thought into what tricks they wanted to have, sigh when they didn't get buffs because the casters were having all the fun (jerks), wonder why they lost their great saves, and if their ultra specific build doesn't work today? Well that's just life.
While the Cleric just prays for an entirely new spell list.
And now look where we are. A Fighter can have more Feats, which do more, but they are optional. They have a few class features, some garbage like 1/day rerolls of saves (and they still haven't gotten their good saves back!), and spellcasters are still not giving them buffs, because now they can only have one spell with a duration going (mostly)!
They don't excel at skills anymore than anyone else, they still have no real way to force enemies to engage them outside of limited resources, so all they have is "I swing....for mediocre damage, because monsters have way too many hit points!"*
*I admit to some hyperbole here, but really, 2d6+5 twice per round with an ordinary greatsword is all you're getting for most of your career, unless you have some superiority dice.
I know, GWM, but again, Feats are optional, and a lot of DM's seem to hate GWM, based on vitriol about it I've seen online in the past.
The Fighter feels to me like it needs something. I bet if the Champion gave out static damage boosts and better saves, a lot of players would look at Battlemaster the way we look at the Berserker, lol.
