Match Making in Ranked 5's (Personal MMR vs. Team MMR)

Hey, sorry if this is not the right place for this, but I have a question about how match making works in ranked 5's.

I just played a game where our team went against a Diamond 5, 3 Platinum's, and a Silver player (their solo queue rankings) and my team was a low Gold, two high Silvers, and two Bronzes. Our team is ranked Bronze 2, and the enemy team was (I believe) Bronze 4. So, I have a few questions.

First, I'm making the assumption that the match was based on the MMR of the ranked team itself. We would only get matched with them because both our teams were in Bronze. I'm also assuming they purposely threw/ dodged their placement matches so as to start at the lowest possible bracket.

Why is personal MMR not taken into account when match making in ranked team games? If it is, I don't see how this match-up could be remotely seen as equal. I don't think it is completely out of the question to add personal MMR into the equation of match making (not the predominant factor, but to put lower/upper bounds into it). I don't think it's reasonable to play against people that are two tiers above the majority of your players. I can understand one tier, that makes sense, but two tiers is ridiculous. It is incredibly frustrating to play this sort of game. I don't mind losing, but playing a clearly one-sided match is not fun (and shouldn't really be for the other team, either, at least not for long).

Is the pool really that low that that's the best match that could be made at that moment? I find that incredibly hard to believe.

If solo queue MMR was taken into consideration, then that team could only go against other highly rated solo queuers with a poor team MMR. If they have incredibly long wait times as a result of that, that's their fault for trying to game the system. If they want faster matches, they can remake the team, do placements normally, and get faster queues.

This sort of safeguard would make sense if it also diminished based on the amount of ranked games the team played. For instance, if the team itself has played 20 games with the same players and simply doesn't play well and has a low MMR, then the team MMR would be more of a factor than personal MMR. In the beginning, when the match making only has team MMR to go off of, it's short-sighted to base it solely off of team MMR.

Sorry if this discussion has been done elsewhere or if it's in the wrong place, or if I'm just completely off base here, but I've run into this issue several times when doing ranked 5's with friends. It's one thing to lose a game because of a mistake or having a bad day, and learning what you can fix it and trying to do better with a different strategy next time. It's another to lose a game with near certainty that nothing you or your team could have done different would have affected the outcome.

I find it hard to believe with the breadth of talent and resources at Riot Games' disposal that there cannot be a more sophisticated match making system to make the game more enjoyable for those that play it.