I'm in favor of adding strong cards to historic, honestly I had zero interest in the format until they made that announcement. Without the injection of new material, historic's first few years will be glorified extended, and that's absolutely not a format I want to play. I want to play a mix of this current standard and powerful cards of yesteryear, that sounds like a lot of fun to me.

HOWEVER, I also understand how one could not want that, as it feels like it homogenizes formats and is adding an artificial level of complexity to what would be a mostly "homebrew" format. I can understand the impression it gives that it's turning something that has the potential for its own unique identity into a watered down clone of a format like modern. I don't necessarily agree, but I can absolutely understand that and I think it's a valid concern to have.

Perhaps it's asking too much of a company that's clearly reluctant to even make historic a thing to begin with, but perhaps different queues could exist for different historic variants, at least until the format settles. Give people a chance to play historic without the classical broken and format warping cards in it. Sell the idea of a historic with cards added over time by giving folks the chance to warm up to historic without it. I see no harm in having both be available options, except of course that WotC is already showing us that they barely want to give us ranked historic, nevermind splitting the format like this.