The bases have been 60' in distance for what seems to be forever, at least 75 years that I can document.
However, with the hi-tech, powerful bats and the hard and lively anything-but-soft balls combined with the always increasing athleticism and finely-honed skills of today's player, is it time to go to a 65' base distance?
There really is no argument that the equipment has surpassed the fields as even the NCAA was almost embarassed into changing the minimum distance of outfield fence, but still didn't take it as far as they should because they like offense and home runs. The pitching distance for the older teen and adult players has been moved back. So, why not the bases?
Having gone through this before in the SP game, I know there will be the traditionalists (which only think they have tradition on their side ) will tell you not to mess with the game and that it is too much to ask the players to do. However, when it comes down to it, what player today does not cover 5' in just over a stride, if it takes that much?
The corners wouldn't have to get as close to the batter when crashing the plate, so there is a safety factor here and that extra stride brings a little more defense into the game and a 5-4-3 deuce may not be as rare or spectacular a play as it can be in some games now. If anything, it may give an infielder a better chance to get a runner out on a ball where a step to the side may be necessary to field it.
Much of the todo about moving the pitcher's plate back was to bring more offense to the game by giving the batter a better chance to put the ball into play. Well, it seems that worked out fine. Is it now time for the quid pro quo to the defense? The batters are now putting more balls into play, maybe it is now time to give the defense a chance to catch up.