AG,
I'm not sure where you got your info as it pertains to bats. Back in my playing days, metal bats were far far better than wood bats by pretty much any measure. Lighter, better on off-center hits, ability to go opposite field, distance, etc. I tried using a wood bat a few times in batting practice and could barely get the ball out of the infield, but with metal bats could regulary hit it deep to every field.
They did change the college bat back in 2011, but they still all use metal bats in the college game. Its only in a few summer leagues that they have wood bat only rules.
Kalen,
I'm about to tell you more about baseball bats than you probably want (or need) to know.
ALL metal bats that are BBCOR certified at ANY age level have a 3 oz drop in the weight to length ratio. That number was settled on because the best wood bats are also typically -3, but obviously wood bats are much less uniform in this than metal, and many are only -1 or -2. What is VERY different is the balance of a metal bat, so that it FEELS lighter in motion. (You can think swingweight here.) There is a LOT of weight in the handle of a wood bat; there is very little in the handle of a metal bat. I could go on, but you get the idea. Also, quite obviously, the effective hitting area of a metal bat is significantly bigger; the low minor leagues are littered with players who could hit with metal bats, but aren't nearly as good with wood. Which is why, as I pointed out earlier, really serious baseball players, even at the HS level, tape up the barrel of a wood bat and use it in the cage for BP; better feedback and good practice at really "barreling" the bat and getting it squared up.
As I mentioned earlier, the reason that metal bats came into use in amateur baseball (and softball) many years ago was cost, and NOT performance. Good wood is in short supply, and professional baseball gets most of it. As an example, when my son was playing HS baseball in Atlanta, he played in a summer wood bat tournament sponsored by John Smoltz. Each team was provided 6 brand new Louisville Sluggers at the beginning of the tournament; none of the six made it through the first game. By the end of that game, all of our players were using their own wood bats, most of which had to be replaced a couple of times a summer. (My son had a maple bat called a Southern Hammer; it was a monster, and lasted two summers, but it cost us well over $100.)
However, as the technology for metal bats improved, though, problems developed with the speed at which the ball was coming off of the bat; the golf term for this is "smash factor", which is the relationship of swing speed to ball speed. THAT was what the 2011 rule change to which you refer; the COR of bats was greatly reduced, and EVERY metal bat in use at that point became instantly illegal. If you go to a game tonight, you'll see the umps inspect the bats in front of both dugouts prior to the game to see what the seal on the bat says and whether or not it is legal.
In short, the "bifurcation" in baseball is NOT about the way the game is played, it's about cost. And the rules governing metal bats seek have metal bats that mimic wood bats as much as possible, though it is an imperfect match. Metal bats were "rolled back" for safety reasons, not the way the game is played. So when the "example" of baseball is trotted out as a justification for bifurcating golf, the analogy leaks water like the Titanic.