...an answer poll to the other ludicrous idea being presented. (I'm going to attempt to set up this poll and make answers public; I hope I don't screw it up.)
I like it the way it is, no DH in NL.......DH for the American Leaguers. It is not as bad as you all make it out to be....it does give an American League team advantages and DH gives them opportunity, which means the more likely not to play "small-ball." But it is interesting to see the differences...besides HRs and more offense sells. So, I don't think it is going anywhere in the near future.
Have a player like Adam Dunn on your team and you will understand why they developed the stupid DH. I hate it. Lose some weight so you can run in the outfield or learn the correct way to catch a ball at first! Okay rant over. This is one of the most common arguments in baseball, I stand firmly on the side of no DH.
It's crazy. I'm a baseball purist. Baseball is my favorite sport. I'm a fan of the American League style because I don't like to see wasted at bats. That said, I love the NL style as well. I really have no preference at all to be honest with you.
I'm against the DH. If there had been a DH at the start, Babe Ruth would only be known as a good pitcher.
Whatever. I'm not going to get into a debate about my merits as a baseball fan or purist. I like both ways and have no preference for either. I like the NL strategy and such, but I've grown up watching a DH so I enjoy that as well. If the AL went away from the DH I wouldn't bat an eye about it. I'd probably be disappointed if the NL went DH, but I'd be fine with it ultimately.
Didn't mean to call your merits as a fan into question. "Wasted at-bats" just sounds like stat-geeky thing to say is all. That's fair, and I probably don't give enough credence to that. I'm not sure I'll ever be able to, to be honest. The DH seems like too much of a copout for me to develop a taste for it.
Congratulations, justtxyank, for allowing me to do the first-ever TWSS on the Houston Sport > Texans, Astros, Comets forum.