Will MLB ever get one set of rules?

• sleeper

  

  Ridiculous that a league can't come to an agreement regarding the DH. No one wants to watch pitchers strike out or bunt 3-4 times a game. BORING.
  
  If the NL wants to keep pitchers at the plate, perhaps they should form their own league and GTFO.
• wes_mantooth

  

  Nope. Tradition keeps the pitchers batting and the players union keeps the DH...to help lengthen careers.
• sleeper

  

  wes_mantooth;1391518 wrote:Nope. Tradition keeps the pitchers batting and the players union keeps the DH...to help lengthen careers.

  The NFL should go back to leather helmets; tradition is the dumbest thing ever and I can't wait for the baby boomers to die off.
• Ironman92

  

  You don't even like baseball do you?
  
  I like both.
  
  When the DH came about (1973?).....the amount of innings starting pitchers have thrown has went down ridiculously....and NL managers seem to not let their pitchers go as many innings, having to hit in a significant situation plays along with it.
  
  The NL is a lot more strategy.
• Footwedge

  sleeper;1391514 wrote:Ridiculous that a league can't come to an agreement regarding the DH. No one wants to watch pitchers strike out or bunt 3-4 times a game. BORING.
  
  If the NL wants to keep pitchers at the plate, perhaps they should form their own league and GTFO.

  I love the DH rule...in general. The only problem with it is that some of the great pitchers going back in the day were great hitters, which should be a part of the equation.
  
  Bob Gibson won a lot of his games with his stick. He wasn't a great hitting pitcher but a decent one. Jim Kaat tore the cover off the ball. Jim Palmer could rake.
  
  Before my time, the record setting Indians of '54 had a staff full of good hitting pitchers.
• HitsRus

  

  I've got no problem with how it is now.
• hasbeen

  

  It allows different strategy for each league. From the games to the off-season.
• Con_Alma

  What's ridiculous is that the original post states they can't come to an agreement. Not only can they come to an agreement but they have and it's the product that exists in MLB. The agreement is having both a DH and pitchers batting and they have clearly defined when each scenario will occur.
• Heretic

  

  sleeper;1391514 wrote:Ridiculous that a league can't come to an agreement regarding the DH. No one wants to watch pitchers strike out or bunt 3-4 times a game. BORING.
  
  If the NL wants to keep pitchers at the plate, perhaps they should form their own league and GTFO.

  Just like no one wants to watch juiced-up 40-year-olds get a reprieve from having to downgrade themselves to being beer league softball superstars because the AL has a position where they don't have to field the ball (which is current an impossibility as all the roids have left their bodies so tattered that the act of bending over would cause four different muscles to completely rip off the bone) and can just swing for the fences every single time up?
• Classyposter58

  

  sleeper;1391514 wrote:Ridiculous that a league can't come to an agreement regarding the DH. No one wants to watch pitchers strike out or bunt 3-4 times a game. BORING.
  
  If the NL wants to keep pitchers at the plate, perhaps they should form their own league and GTFO.

  NL games are incredibly boring. Teams play with basically 8 hitters and they work counts so much more it seems, compared to the AL where they just seem to let it rip. I've been to numerous Reds and Tigers games, the difference between the leagues is definitely noticeable. Obviously MLB players are MLB players, and yeah the NL doesn't suck, heck the Giants easily won the WS last year, but there's a reason the AL has had a better record in interleague play the last 9 seasons. Last year it was 142-110
• wildcats20

  

  Classyposter58;1391863 wrote:NL games are incredibly boring. Teams play with basically 8 hitters and they work counts so much more it seems, compared to the AL where they just seem to let it rip. I've been to numerous Reds and Tigers games, the difference between the leagues is definitely noticeable. Obviously MLB players are MLB players, and yeah the NL doesn't suck, heck the Giants easily won the WS last year, but there's a reason the AL has had a better record in interleague play the last 9 seasons. Last year it was 142-110

  Well the NL does have a 7-6 WS advantage since 2000. So I guess the NL is better when it matters.
• gport_tennis

  Classyposter58;1391863 wrote:NL games are incredibly boring. Teams play with basically 8 hitters and they work counts so much more it seems, compared to the AL where they just seem to let it rip. I've been to numerous Reds and Tigers games, the difference between the leagues is definitely noticeable. Obviously MLB players are MLB players, and yeah the NL doesn't suck, heck the Giants easily won the WS last year, but there's a reason the AL has had a better record in interleague play the last 9 seasons. Last year it was 142-110

  
  What was the Houston Astros record in interleague play last year. With them moving to the AL I got a maj in that would even things out
• wildcats20

  

  gport_tennis;1391870 wrote:What was the Houston Astros record in interleague play last year. With them moving to the AL I got a maj in that would even things out

  6-9
• Pick6

  

  Footwedge;1391567 wrote:I love the DH rule...in general. The only problem with it is that some of the great pitchers going back in the day were great hitters, which should be a part of the equation.
  
  Bob Gibson won a lot of his games with his stick. He wasn't a great hitting pitcher but a decent one. Jim Kaat tore the cover off the ball. Jim Palmer could rake.
  
  Before my time, the record setting Indians of '54 had a staff full of good hitting pitchers.

  I dont give a fuck about "back in they day"
• Mulva

  

  wildcats20;1391865 wrote:Well the NL does have a 7-6 WS advantage since 2000. So I guess the NL is better when it matters.

  Teams and leagues are pretty different.
• Ironman92

  

  Classyposter58;1391863 wrote:NL games are incredibly boring. Teams play with basically 8 hitters and they work counts so much more it seems, compared to the AL where they just seem to let it rip. I've been to numerous Reds and Tigers games, the difference between the leagues is definitely noticeable. Obviously MLB players are MLB players, and yeah the NL doesn't suck, heck the Giants easily won the WS last year, but there's a reason the AL has had a better record in interleague play the last 9 seasons. Last year it was 142-110

  
  I disagree on working counts....the Yanks and Sox got that really going, the Giants jumped on that though. To me the AL jumps on more 1st pitches, but when they don't they work the count more than the NL.
• karen lotz

  

  sitting back and waiting for 2 or 3 run HRs is more exciting than stolen bases, hit and run, taking extra bases, etc?
• sleeper

  

  wildcats20;1391865 wrote:Well the NL does have a 7-6 WS advantage since 2000. So I guess the NL is better when it matters.

  I've labeled this the "SEC Fallacy". You are drawing a conclusion based on a small sample size while ignoring the far more relevant overall record. Best team does not equal best league.
• hasbeen

  

  karen lotz;1391896 wrote:sitting back and waiting for 2 or 3 run HRs is more exciting than stolen bases, hit and run, taking extra bases, etc?

  For those who only watch highlights, yes.
• Mulva

  

  The NL had 7 of the 8 lowest scoring teams in baseball last year. It goes a little beyond the highlights.
• karen lotz

  

  Had 5 of the top 10 too.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  karen lotz;1391896 wrote:sitting back and waiting for 2 or 3 run HRs is more exciting than stolen bases, hit and run, taking extra bases, etc?

  
  Fuck you, Lotz. I agree with you!
• Glory Days

  

  sleeper;1391523 wrote:The NFL should go back to leather helmets; tradition is the dumbest thing ever and I can't wait for the baby boomers to die off.

  maybe they would stop diving head first at each other and dying from brain injuries if they did.
• sleeper

  

  Glory Days;1391978 wrote:maybe they would stop diving head first at each other and dying from brain injuries if they did.

  Yeah because I'd really love to sit down and watch a bunch of white guys fall over each other on the field. :rolleyes:
• Classyposter58

  

  karen lotz;1391896 wrote:sitting back and waiting for 2 or 3 run HRs is more exciting than stolen bases, hit and run, taking extra bases, etc?

  Uh yes? Why do you think baseball got so big in the 90s? Because players were hitting homers at an unbelievable pace. Also you act like the AL doesn't have base stealers or the hit and run. They just don't have to rely on it so much because of the DH