I used to be very much in favor of it. I couldn't wait to see the likes of the Yankees and Mariners in Houston. Ten freakin' years later, I've seen the Royals and White Sox and the freaking Devil Rays; OH and the Rangers. How many times have the Yankees, Red Sox, or Mariners come to Houston? How many was that again? Piss on it all. In the meantime, the Interleague games eat up a part of the season where we could see more games against the Mets, Braves, and Dodgers. FAR more interesting than the freaking Royals. I know some younger folks may not remember, but the Astros have quite a history with the Dodgers (nothing like Dodgers-Giants, of course), and that's all been cut off with this ridiculous schedule. It sucks. It's crap. It's stupid. It's boring. It's bullcrap. Interleague play sucks. The unbalanced schedule sucks. The DH sucks. And the American League sucks. Thanks for asking.
I have to agree with you there. The schedule sucks, causing pretty much everything else to suck. And the DH is just stupid.
i tend to agree. plus...i kinda liked the idea that the AL team and the NL team had NEVER faced each other by the time they got to the WS. just something different about that.
It's purpose is to draw a ton of fans to the games, which I believe it continues to do. As much as some people dislike it, interleague play is extremely popular.
In places like NY and CHI where two teams play. I doubt seriously the Astros are drawing more for the AL Central teams that come to play here than they do for the NL Central teams that play here.
you're right. it's POSSIBLE they might be scheduled for games here this coming season (2008). but it's not definite. and this has been going on for what??? 10 years or so now???
What an exciting element.....watching possibly some of the most incompetent (using the term loosely) "hitters" try and have a meaningful at bat in possibly a meaningful situation is reeeaaaalllll awesome. I mean, having David Ortiz smash balls into the stands really pales in comparison. You people are lying to yourselves.
david ortiz would be playing anyway. i think you're missing his point. he's not saying he loves watching pitchers hit. i think he's saying pitchers in the lineup creates need for strategy and coaching that the AL obviates. the way the game was played for decades before they were taken out. my thought is pretty simple...if you're in the lineup, you need to be in the field as well.
Precisely. And, one more rebuttal, nay, two: The entire game is what is exciting to me--all the elements, not just the sexy atbats where the slugger stands in against the great pitcher. Thanks for the ad hominem, but just because you don't understand someone's position or preference doesn't mean he's "lying to himself." Since we're to the point of ad hominem, allow me to return the volley: you must be one of those shallow chicks who dig only the long ball.
Ugh I used to be for interleague play, but damn is it's usefulness all worned out. And after realizing what the system the MLB uses to set, yeah that really sucks. I know, let's create an Astros-Rangers rivalry even though there's almost no history between them and the only thing they have in common is the fact they are in Texas. Oh yeah we'll keep chugging out teams like the Royals for the Astros to play instead of teams people actually want to see like the Yankees and Red Sox. And the unbalanced scheduling, there is no reason why in this wild-card era that we have to play division teams so many times. Yes, the media would love to see Yanks-Sox 16 times a year , but I want to see Braves and Mets and Dodgers damnmit, teams that we have a history against as well as teams that are important in the coming playoffs.
you're probably right, but then you people, under the guise of "purists", would complain about defense. I'm not missing the point. Coaching in baseball is overrated. You are just leaving room for all but two managers to overthink themselves and to make terrible decision after terrible decision. It results in bad baseball as Garner has shown us time and time again. And there is a reason they are called "managers" and not coaches. Coaches coach and managers manage talent. As far a strategy goes, who, in your opinion, are the best strategic managers in the game?
"you people" my son has a david ortiz red sox t-shirt...i promise you that you won't hear me complain when he's in the lineup. good question...i'd have to think about that, honestly. i'm not sure. but i know that timing of removing pitchers isn't given a second thought in the AL. i know that games drag on like crazy. the double-switch doesn't exist. these are things that NL managers have to be thinking about. AL managers just don't. as a fan, i prefer it the NL way. every poll i've ever seen of fans across the country says the same thing. very few really like the DH.
Oh, yes you are. You've got a Derrick Bell hat trick going--0-for-3 with 3 k's. You haven't even made contact. SWOOOSH! Swing and a miss! The quality (or lack thereof) of the manager has nothing to do with the quality of the game being played. The game is more challenging when every hitter has to play defense and every pitcher has to hit (or be pinch-hit for and removed from the game). The challenges those rules create, and how teams respond, are far more interesting than lining up a bunch of sluggers and having batting practice for nine innings. I'm not trying to change your mind; you have your preference and I have mine. But no one here is "lying to himself", and you have certainly missed the point as to why many people much prefer NL baseball to the junior circuit.