First of all, round robin is pools, with the exception that you have only 1 pool, and you don't follow it with a bracket. (I assume you knew that, but your post was a little ambiguous.) Thus, hosting doubles as a round robin, rather than a bracket, is exactly the same as running pools, only easier - because no seeding is required.
Since you mention it, though, pools are certainly something worth considering:
Even if we were to do pools for every event, lack of knowledge would be far from the biggest issue. Pools are not hard, especially given the relatively small size of the tournament, and the relative familiarity we all have with one another. Time considerations would be the only realistic concern, but even that could be alleviated by running pools -> slightly smaller bracket.
Personally, I think pools is a great idea (entirely separately from my feelings about having round robin doubles). Everyone gets more tournament sets, and bracket seeding is earned based on current, rather than past, performance. However, I do see the other side of the argument: that for an event like this, pools are overkill, will take too long, are boring, etc.
I think, though, that it's definitely worth trying. As long as people are good about playing their matches promptly and understand that turnout might necessitate that not everyone advances to bracket, there is no reason it can't work.
I'd be more than happy to manage pools, if you really feel that no one has the knowledge or experience. But, again, I believe that you're overestimating the difficulty involved.
Regardless, if someone wants to chat about this weekend, it would prolly be easier over aim than over the boards 
Wokka wokka.
