Not sure what point you are trying to make but the original poster is clearly frustrated by their teams lack of competitiveness and inclusion in the qualifier. I sympathize with them. Our team had no shot at advancing yet we attended for the "experience". It costs a lot of money to attend. Without a real tier system you had top talent teams playing non competitive teams day 1. Day 2 separated the talent slightly but how was CoachC not on the opposite side of the bracket of 91. Both are the top teams in this class. The seeding should of had them meet in the finals unless an upset occurred. That is how seeding works. One of the teams in the finals clearly didn't belong there. The lack of oversight in lacrosse is unbelievable. Why is there no tiered system like other youth sports (hockey, soccer). It doesn't make either program better to play teams well out of talent level in either direction.
CoachC had the easiest schedule of any team - they didn’t make it to the championship game because they allowed too many goals in the first day and ranked below Igloo at the end of the day. That’s squarely on them and not the fault of the tournament. They ended up with the #2 seed in their bracket because of how they played the first day, which meant they had to play with #1 seed from the opposite bracket in the semifinals.
I can understand some mid-level teams may complain that they had harder schedules than some other mid-level teams, that’s going to happen at that level, but CoachC cannot complain. They were set up for a cakewalk and should have met 91 in the finals, but seeding can’t guarantee who meets who in the finals - that’s up to how the teams actually play.
