Five big cases with no unifying mechanism other than "overrule" may be too large for the negative. [Especially if those cases are (justifiably) picked to force the negative into as much specificity as possible.]

I may be wrong, but the breadth of the subject matter of the cases on the "short list" gives me pause.

While treaties was a very successful topic, it was still huge. Even Northwestern, everyone's example of the "uber-borg," had no SORT cards at Georgia State.

Seeing how we haven't had a court topic in 15 years, just about every debater (and a significant number of coaches) will be venturing into wholly new libraries.

We may also have some new NDT rules that will require a season-long shift in focus that puts a premium on pre-tournament preparation by debaters.

Given all that, I'd at least like the opportunity to evaluate a smaller list.

I understand the fear that some will arbitrarily vote for the smallest topic.

I hope that the community at large is more considered and can spend the time to evaluate the educational gains of a larger list against what they think they can educationally prepare to debate over the course of the season.

--JP