@mastiffslinger
Yes I do partly agree with you here. Its not good from a competitive standpoint that you can end up with teammates several ranks below you. One big reason is how they pamper duo premades. You can be bronze and join a gold player premade right? And then matchmaking will then match you according to the gold players rank. This is only "fair" for the premade duo which chooses to play with each other but what Respawn totally ignores how UNFAIR this is for their 3rd random teammate, who is gold elo and is matched with a statistically weaker team. So this principle is objectively wrong IMO.
BUT I think you are very biased in your take of the situation and I think you only remember the negative times. First of all, I dont believe that you get lower ranked teammates in "every" match, probably not even in majority of matches. I think that if you would take a screenshot of 100 of your ranked teammates, you would see that its quite evenly distributed. Thats why we need a match history!!!
Also, one factor that you miss here is that in many of those matches, for instance if you are gold3 and you get two silver teammates, is that the lobby you got matched in is average silver. So YOU have an advantage here but its easy to just notice the negatives. Thats why we need to see the average ELO of the lobby we play at. This is not information that should be hidden!
@r1ggedgame
In this arguments, I only refer to ranked and in ranked, the number of kills should not be a factor in the matchmaking. In ranked, the matchmaking should ONLY match based on rank. The problem here is that the current rank system is super bad at putting a given player at the rank that corresponds to his actual skills. I honestly believe that if you would randomly take 1000 players from, lets say "silver3" and let each of them fight each other in a million 1v1s, there would be some players that would literally win close to zero of those when, in a "good" ranked system, everyone SHOULD have 500.000 wins give or take.