As we promoted before with the Stephen Strasburg debate, Around The Horn Baseball is hosting a series of baseball debates within the Bloguin network. It's been great so far, and has really showcased the talented baseball writers around Bloguin. For this weeks installment, I was asked to debate against Matt O'Donnell of Fenway West about whether or not the MLB is better with or without the DH. Here's my intro:
"The year was 1972. The arcade game, Pong, had just revolutionized teenage lifestyle, the price of gas was 55 cents a gallon, and the song Layla was on the top of the charts. Football and baseball teams shared their venues in big, ugly, multi-purpose stadiums, and the stars of the day like Hank Aaron, Billy Williams, Pete Rose, Joe Morgan, Willie Stargel and Johnny Bench were all in the National League.
Baseball, particularly the American League, was in a crisis of offensive drought at the time. Just three years earlier Major League Baseball had lowered the pitchers mound after the Year of the Pitcher had demolished offense from the game. The American League had only hit .230 and the man they call Yaz had just led the American League in batting with a whopping .301 batting average.
Furthermore, American League owners were in a bind..."