I can't argue with any of the major issues that you brought up
AM, but I think your criticism comes off as a little too harsh when you consider that these three teams were built in a little over two hours. It's impossible to create flawless teams in such a short period; there are just too many threats to take into account and it's only natural that when you're building on the spot there are a couple that will slip your mind. In fact the hosts did build them largely keeping most of the relevant metagame threats in mind, or at least made plenty of effort to do so. This is quite clear from the
log as after every suggestion they'd look back and see what weaknesses the added Pokemon created. I agree that some of problems are quite serious, like the lack of reliable switch-ins to Sand Rush Excadrill in the first team, lack of speed control in the second, and the weakness to Mega Zam in the third, so there's definitely scope for improvement and in the future that'll be worked on.
The main motivation behind these workshops though was to give people an idea of how they can build around cores effectively. You can see from the log that there was plenty of quality discussion going on and the hosts consistently brought up good points, came up with clever ideas for teammates for the cores, and generally put in a lot of thought into their suggestions. As I said they also kept most of the relevant metagame threats in mind. Now if the resulting team has some issues, that's fine, as long as people can learn and incorporate at least a few of the concepts from the workshop into their teambuilding. That's the bottom line and if people can take a couple of valuable lessons from the workshop, I'd consider it a success.
Some of the issues you mentioned are also things that are hard to keep in mind when you're building on the spot, like Belly Drum Azu and Manaphy's item, especially when they're relatively irrelevant and can be easily fixed. I also don't think the teams are as weak to some of the threats to the extent you were suggesting. Correct me if I'm wrong as I don't play much OU, but for the second team specially defensive Skarm + Knock Off Mew check Mega Zam pretty well together, while TTar doesn't seem to be much of an issue at all. And for the third team, Manaphy is checked by Latias + fast Manaphy, while physically defensive Skarm + EB Manaphy together check Azu decently. Now I know these aren't definitive counters, but considering the teams were built impromptu, for me the way they handle those threats is quite acceptable when the main focus of the workshop is to brainstorm ideas that people can learn from and take into consideration for their own teambuilding.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that nitpicking weaknesses is not something that should be concentrated on too much because the workshop is more based on ideas and theory, and building a team that is solid against every threat in the metagame is unrealistic to expect considering the very nature of these workshops. Obviously though the teams can't be too weak to common and relevant builds because that could mislead people, so you definitely bring up some good points and a lot of your criticism is justified. Overall I appreciate the feedback man and we'll look to make sure that the hosts of future OU workshops build teams while keeping your points in mind.
