<<Rules, question distributions, playoff
schemes, and the like seem to be designed with the idea
that certain teams must win.>>
The point
of a playoff structure, in my mind, is to give a
framework in which to determine a champion **among a group
of qualified teams.**
Once the teams have
made that initial cut, you cannot consider a playoff
format "unfair", IMO, unless it gives the top-flight
teams that made the cut a WORSE chance of winning the
tournament than the second-tier teams that also made the
cut.
And, to ask a question which I think has been asked
before: what is so inherently wrong with an
upset?
[I am not going to comment on the choice or editing
of the packets, as I had no role therein.]
As Doug pointed out, and I will reiterate: if you
have a format that:
(a) doesn't use single-elim,
(b) doesn't put an undue burden on Penn (e.g.,
editing 13 packets and writing 10 more),
(c) doesn't
take all night, and
(d) gives teams as many games
as possible,
I'd be glad to hear it.