Event Title: 2024 Top Gun Invitational
Date: June 13 – 16, 2024
Location: Kansas • Missouri
Division: Maverick 16U

Introduction

The 2024 Top Gun Invitational’s Maverick 16U Division was a showcase of top-tier softball talent, with teams from across the nation converging in Kansas and Missouri for an intense competition. This event, recognized as one of the premier recruiting showcases of the season, attracted over 350 college recruiters, making it a pivotal opportunity for players to demonstrate their skills on a national stage.

“The level of competition and talent on display this year has been outstanding,” said Robb Behymer, Event Director for Top Gun Events. “We are proud to provide a platform where these young athletes can not only compete at a high level but also gain the exposure they deserve. The presence of so many recruiters underscores the significance of this event for the future of these players.”

With such a vast array of scouts and recruiters in attendance, the tournament provided unparalleled exposure for the participating teams and athletes. This year’s Top Gun Invitational cemented its status as a must-attend event for teams looking to compete at the highest level and for players aspiring to take the next step in their athletic careers.

Overall Summary

The Maverick 16U Division at the 2024 Top Gun Invitational was marked by intense competition, strategic play, and standout performances. The tournament featured a blend of dominant teams that consistently performed well in both pool and bracket play, as well as resilient squads that overcame early setbacks to make deep runs.

Several teams demonstrated extraordinary balance, excelling in both offense and defense, while others relied on their adaptability and resilience to navigate the challenges of the bracket stages. The Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16u (TX) emerged as the champions, displaying unmatched consistency and determination, particularly in the face of tough opponents.

Nebraska Gold deMontel (NE) and Beverly Bandits Premier Freeland (MI) were also standout performers, dominating pool play and making deep bracket runs, though they ultimately fell short of the championship. Meanwhile, teams like Tennessee Mojo Mojo-Lewis ’08 (GA) and Unity Johnson 2026 (VA) showcased their strength in pool play but faced stiffer competition in the later rounds.

The tournament was a testament to the depth of talent in the Maverick 16U Division, with each team bringing its unique strengths to the field. The diversity of playing styles, from power-hitting lineups to defensively sound squads, made for a dynamic and unpredictable tournament. As these teams continue to develop and refine their skills, the lessons learned from this tournament will undoubtedly propel them to future successes.

Team-by-Team Analysis

1. Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16u (TX)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 4-1
  • Runs Scored: 25
  • Runs Allowed: 8
  • Run Differential: +17
  • Pool Standings: 2nd place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 8-0
  • Runs Scored: 45
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 8
  • Championship Game: 7-2 victory over Nebraska Gold National Perkins (NE)

• Overall Placement: 1st Place (Champion)

• Analysis:

  • Dominant Defense and Pitching: The Hotshots demonstrated exceptional defensive capabilities throughout the tournament. In pool play, they allowed only 8 runs over 5 games, and in bracket play, they maintained this strong defensive presence by allowing just 16 runs over 8 rounds. This indicates a well-coordinated team with effective pitching and solid fielding.
  • Offensive Consistency: Offensively, the Hotshots were efficient, scoring 45 runs in bracket play alone. Their ability to consistently put runs on the board, combined with their defensive strength, made them a formidable opponent. Their offense showed depth and resilience, managing to score effectively in both high-pressure and routine situations.
  • Resilience After Early Setback: The team’s only loss came during pool play, where they finished second in their pool. This early setback did not deter them; instead, they used it as a springboard to dominate the bracket stages, showing their ability to learn and adapt quickly.

• Overall Summary:

  • The Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16u team exemplified a balanced and resilient approach throughout the tournament. Their ability to recover from an early pool play loss and dominate the bracket rounds, ultimately leading to a championship win, highlights their mental toughness and strategic prowess. Their combination of strong pitching, tight defense, and consistent offense allowed them to excel when it mattered most.

2. Nebraska Gold deMontel (NE)

• Pool C Stats:

  • Record: 5-0
  • Runs Scored: 53
  • Runs Allowed: 12
  • Run Differential: +41
  • Pool Standings: 1st place in Pool C

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 4-2
  • Runs Scored: 29
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 6
  • Final Placement: Runner-up (Lost to Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16u)

• Overall Placement: 2nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Explosive Pool Play Performance: Nebraska Gold was the standout team in pool play, going undefeated with a staggering +41 run differential. Their offense was particularly potent, scoring 53 runs over 5 games, which indicates a team capable of overwhelming opponents quickly. Their defense was equally strong, allowing just 12 runs, showcasing their balance on both sides of the ball.
  • Challenges in Bracket Play: Despite their dominance in pool play, Nebraska Gold faced more challenges in the bracket rounds. Their scoring dropped to 29 runs over 6 games, a noticeable decline from their pool play output. This suggests that they encountered stronger competition in the bracket stages, which tested their ability to maintain their high level of performance.
  • Finals Performance: In the championship game, Nebraska Gold’s offensive struggles were apparent as they were held to just 2 runs by the Hotshots. Despite their best efforts, they couldn’t replicate the offensive firepower that had carried them through pool play, leading to a runner-up finish.

• Overall Summary:

  • Nebraska Gold deMontel (NE) was a powerhouse during pool play, demonstrating an ability to dominate both offensively and defensively. However, as the tournament progressed into the bracket stages, their performance, particularly on offense, began to wane. While they reached the finals, their inability to sustain their early momentum ultimately led to their defeat. Nonetheless, their overall performance was impressive, and they remain one of the top teams in the tournament.

3. Beverly Bandits Premier Freeland (MI)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 5-0
  • Runs Scored: 30
  • Runs Allowed: 7
  • Run Differential: +23
  • Pool Standings: 1st place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 4-2
  • Runs Scored: 26
  • Runs Allowed: 17
  • Rounds Played: 6
  • Final Placement: Lost in semifinals to Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16u

• Overall Placement: 3rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Strong Defensive Performance: The Beverly Bandits were one of the most defensively sound teams in the tournament. In pool play, they allowed just 7 runs over 5 games, highlighting their ability to shut down opponents. This defensive strength carried them through to the semifinals, where they continued to be difficult to score against.
  • Offensive Output: While their offense was consistent in pool play, scoring 30 runs, it was less potent in bracket play, where they managed 26 runs over 6 games. This decline in scoring suggests that the Bandits faced tougher defenses in the later stages, which limited their ability to generate runs.
  • Semifinals Performance: The Bandits’ tournament run ended in the semifinals, where they faced the eventual champions, the Hotshots. In this game, their offense struggled to break through, which, combined with the Hotshots’ strong defense, led to their elimination.

• Overall Summary:

  • The Beverly Bandits Premier Freeland (MI) team was marked by their strong defensive play and consistent performance in pool play. However, their offense did not maintain the same level of productivity in bracket play, which ultimately contributed to their semifinal exit. Despite this, their overall performance was strong, and they proved themselves to be one of the top teams in the tournament.

4. Unity Johnson 2026 (VA)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 5-0
  • Runs Scored: 26
  • Runs Allowed: 10
  • Run Differential: +16
  • Pool Standings: 1st place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 17
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in semifinals

• Overall Placement: 4th Place

• Analysis:

  • Balanced Play in Pool Rounds: Unity Johnson 2026 displayed strong all-around play in pool play, going undefeated with a +16 run differential. Their ability to balance offense and defense was key to their success and earned them the top spot in their pool.
  • Competitive Bracket Run: Unity Johnson continued to perform well in bracket play, advancing to the semifinals. However, as the competition level increased, they encountered more challenges, particularly in scoring, which ultimately led to their elimination.

• Overall Summary:

  • Unity Johnson 2026 had a well-rounded performance throughout the tournament, excelling in pool play and making a deep run in the bracket rounds. Although their tournament ended in the semifinals, their balanced play and consistent effort highlighted their ability to compete with the best.

5. Carolina Elite National Fusetti (SC)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 4-1
  • Runs Scored: 22
  • Runs Allowed: 13
  • Run Differential: +9
  • Pool Standings: 1st place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 5th Place

• Analysis:

  • Consistent Pool Play Performance: Carolina Elite National Fusetti topped Pool A with a 4-1 record, showcasing a strong, well-rounded team. They maintained a positive run differential, indicating both offensive and defensive capabilities.
  • Bracket Play Struggles: While they started strong, Carolina Elite faced tougher opposition in the bracket rounds, where their scoring dropped, and they were eventually eliminated in the quarterfinals. Their performance suggests that while they were strong contenders, they struggled to maintain momentum against the top-tier teams.

• Overall Summary:

  • Carolina Elite National Fusetti had a solid run in pool play, securing the top spot in their pool. However, their journey was cut short in the quarterfinals, where they couldn’t keep pace with the increasingly competitive field. Despite their early exit, their strong pool play performance indicates they are a team with significant potential.

6. LK Black Hawaii Danz (HI)

• Pool B Stats:

  • Record: 5-0
  • Runs Scored: 49
  • Runs Allowed: 21
  • Run Differential: +28
  • Pool Standings: 1st place in Pool B

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-1
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 12
  • Rounds Played: 3
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 6th Place

• Analysis:

  • Explosive Offense in Pool Play: LK Black Hawaii dominated their pool, finishing with a perfect 5-0 record and a +28 run differential. Their offense was among the most potent in the tournament, consistently putting up big numbers.
  • Challenges in Bracket Play: Despite their dominance in pool play, LK Black Hawaii struggled to replicate their high-scoring form in the bracket stages. Their scoring dropped significantly, and they were eliminated in the quarterfinals after a closely contested game.

• Overall Summary:

  • LK Black Hawaii Danz showed their offensive prowess in pool play, leading to an undefeated record. However, their inability to maintain this level of play in the bracket rounds resulted in an earlier-than-expected exit. Still, their pool performance was impressive and set them apart as one of the stronger teams in the tournament.

7. Tennessee Mojo Mojo-Lewis ’08 (GA)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 5-0
  • Runs Scored: 36
  • Runs Allowed: 11
  • Run Differential: +25
  • Pool Standings: 1st place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 22
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 7th Place

• Analysis:

  • Strong Pool Play Showing: Tennessee Mojo demonstrated both offensive and defensive strength in pool play, going undefeated with a +25 run differential. Their ability to control games from start to finish made them one of the top contenders entering the bracket rounds.
  • Inconsistent Bracket Performance: In bracket play, Tennessee Mojo faced stiffer competition, resulting in more tightly contested games. Their offensive output dropped, and they were eventually eliminated in the quarterfinals, highlighting some challenges in maintaining consistency against stronger teams.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tennessee Mojo Mojo-Lewis ’08 had a standout performance in pool play, securing the top spot in their pool with ease. However, the increased difficulty of bracket play exposed some inconsistencies, leading to their quarterfinal exit. Nonetheless, their overall tournament run was strong, and they demonstrated the potential to compete at the highest level.

8. Georgia Impact Taylor (GA)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 4-1
  • Runs Scored: 48
  • Runs Allowed: 15
  • Run Differential: +33
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 4-3
  • Runs Scored: 35
  • Runs Allowed: 25
  • Rounds Played: 7
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 8th Place

• Analysis:

  • High-Scoring Offense: Georgia Impact Taylor was one of the highest-scoring teams in the tournament, with an impressive +33 run differential in pool play. Their ability to generate runs consistently made them a threat in every game.
  • Challenging Bracket Play: While they continued to score well in bracket play, Georgia Impact faced tougher defenses that limited their effectiveness. They played a total of 7 rounds, highlighting their resilience, but were ultimately eliminated in the quarterfinals after a hard-fought battle.

• Overall Summary:

  • Georgia Impact Taylor demonstrated their offensive capabilities throughout the tournament, making them one of the most exciting teams to watch. However, their inability to sustain this level against tougher bracket opponents led to their quarterfinal exit. Despite this, their overall performance was strong, and they showed they could compete at a high level.

9. Nebraska Gold National Perkins (NE)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 19
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -11
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 5-3
  • Runs Scored: 38
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 8
  • Final Placement: Runner-up (Lost to Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16u)

• Overall Placement: 9th Place

• Analysis:

  • Resilient Bracket Performance: Despite a challenging pool play performance where they finished with a 2-3 record, Nebraska Gold National Perkins showed tremendous resilience in the bracket rounds. They won 5 out of 8 games in bracket play, advancing all the way to the finals.
  • Turnaround in Offense: After a modest pool play performance, Nebraska Gold’s offense found its stride in the bracket rounds, scoring 38 runs. Their ability to improve and adapt throughout the tournament was key to their deep run.

• Overall Summary:

  • Nebraska Gold National Perkins’ journey from a challenging pool play to a runner-up finish in the tournament is a testament to their resilience and determination. Their ability to turn their performance around in the bracket stages shows they are a team capable of rising to the occasion, even when facing adversity.

10. Sparks Softball Premier Harvey (IL)

• Pool B Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 22
  • Runs Allowed: 19
  • Run Differential: +3
  • Pool Standings: 2nd place in Pool B

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 14
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 10th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Sparks Softball Premier Harvey had a solid showing in pool play, finishing 3-2 with a +3 run differential. Their performance earned them a spot in the upper bracket, where they continued to compete strongly.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Sparks Softball faced tougher opponents and saw a slight dip in both their offensive and defensive performances. They were eliminated in the quarterfinals, highlighting the competitive nature of the tournament.

• Overall Summary:

  • Sparks Softball Premier Harvey showcased their competitive spirit throughout the tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. However, their journey ended in the quarterfinals, where they faced strong opposition. Despite this, their overall performance was commendable, and they remain a team to watch in future competitions.

11. Beverly Bandits Premier Hardin (IL)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 4-1
  • Runs Scored: 28
  • Runs Allowed: 5
  • Run Differential: +23
  • Pool Standings: 2nd place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 13
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 11th Place

• Analysis:

  • Defensive Masterclass in Pool Play: Beverly Bandits Premier Hardin excelled defensively in pool play, allowing only 5 runs across 5 games. Their ability to limit opponents’ scoring opportunities was a key factor in their strong pool play performance.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket stages, Beverly Bandits Premier Hardin maintained a competitive edge but faced stiffer competition, leading to a quarterfinal exit. Their defensive strength remained, but they struggled to generate the same offensive output as in pool play.

• Overall Summary:

  • Beverly Bandits Premier Hardin demonstrated a solid all-around game, particularly in defense, during pool play. However, they faced tougher opponents in bracket play, which ultimately led to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their overall performance was commendable, and they remain a strong contender in future events.

12. Impact Premier Sullivan (GA)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 3-1-1
  • Runs Scored: 32
  • Runs Allowed: 9
  • Run Differential: +23
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 5-2
  • Runs Scored: 33
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 7
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in semifinals

• Overall Placement: 12th Place

• Analysis:

  • Strong Offensive and Defensive Performance: Impact Premier Sullivan demonstrated a balanced approach in pool play, with a strong +23 run differential. Their solid defense and potent offense positioned them as a tough team to beat.
  • Deep Bracket Run: In the bracket rounds, Impact Premier Sullivan continued their strong play, advancing to the semifinals. They faced some of the top teams in the tournament and held their own, showcasing their ability to compete at the highest level.

• Overall Summary:

  • Impact Premier Sullivan had a well-rounded tournament, performing strongly in both pool and bracket play. Their semifinal appearance highlighted their consistency and competitiveness, making them one of the top teams in the Maverick 16U Division.

13. Lady Lightning Gold LLG Elite Corn (NC)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 4-1
  • Runs Scored: 23
  • Runs Allowed: 8
  • Run Differential: +15
  • Pool Standings: 2nd place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 4-2
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 6
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in semifinals

• Overall Placement: 13th Place

• Analysis:

  • Strong Pool Play Performance: Lady Lightning Gold performed well in pool play, finishing with a 4-1 record and a +15 run differential. Their strong defense and consistent offense were key to their success.
  • Challenging Bracket Run: In bracket play, Lady Lightning Gold advanced to the semifinals but faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination. Despite their exit, their overall performance was strong, and they proved to be a formidable opponent.

• Overall Summary:

  • Lady Lightning Gold LLG Elite Corn had a successful tournament, with strong performances in both pool and bracket play. Their semifinal appearance underscored their competitiveness and potential, making them a team to watch in future tournaments.

14. Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose (NE)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 19
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -11
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 14th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -11 run differential. Their struggles in both offense and defense highlighted areas for improvement.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose had a challenging tournament, with struggles in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit provides them with valuable lessons for future competitions, where they will look to improve and build on their experiences.

15. Beverly Bandits Premier Moran (IN)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Run Differential: -9
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 15th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Beverly Bandits Premier Moran struggled in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -9 run differential. Their challenges on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Beverly Bandits Premier Moran faced similar struggles, leading to an early exit. Their performance highlighted the areas where improvement is needed.

• Overall Summary:

  • Beverly Bandits Premier Moran had a difficult tournament, with early exits in both pool and bracket play. Despite the challenges, the experience gained will be valuable for the team as they look to improve in future competitions.

16. USA Athletics Rogers/Mathis (CA)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 33
  • Run Differential: -19
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 16th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: USA Athletics Rogers/Mathis faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -19 run differential. Their difficulties were apparent on both offense and defense.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, USA Athletics Rogers/Mathis managed to secure a win, but their overall struggles continued, leading to an early exit.

• Overall Summary:

  • USA Athletics Rogers/Mathis had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

17. Tampa Mustangs Bell (FL)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 26
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Run Differential: 0
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 17th Place

• Analysis:

  • Balanced Pool Play: Tampa Mustangs Bell had a balanced pool play, with an equal number of runs scored and allowed, finishing with a 3-2 record. Their performance was solid but left room for improvement.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Tampa Mustangs Bell advanced to the quarterfinals but faced stronger competition, leading to their elimination.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tampa Mustangs Bell had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their quarterfinal exit, however, highlighted the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

18. Epic Fastpitch National Lewis (OK)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 22
  • Runs Allowed: 36
  • Run Differential: -14
  • Pool Standings: 7th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 15
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 18th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Epic Fastpitch National Lewis faced difficulties in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -14 run differential. Their challenges were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Epic Fastpitch National Lewis continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Epic Fastpitch National Lewis had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

19. Select Fastpitch Woelbel (MO)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 21
  • Run Differential: 0
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 19th Place

• Analysis:

  • Balanced Pool Play: Select Fastpitch Woelbel had a balanced pool play performance, with an equal number of runs scored and allowed. Their 2-3 record highlighted their ability to compete, but with some inconsistency.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Select Fastpitch Woelbel faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the round of 32. Their performance was competitive, but they struggled to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Select Fastpitch Woelbel had a solid tournament, with balanced performances in both pool and bracket play. Despite their early exit, they showed potential and will look to build on their experience in future competitions.

20. Firecrackers Leles (CA)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Run Differential: -10
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 20th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Firecrackers Leles faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -10 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers Leles managed to win two games but were ultimately eliminated in the round of 32. Their performance highlighted areas for improvement.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers Leles had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. Despite their early exit, the experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

21. USA Athletics Lehr (CA)

• Pool C Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 30
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Run Differential: +8
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool C

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 21st Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: USA Athletics Lehr had a solid showing in pool play, finishing with a 3-2 record and a +8 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, USA Athletics Lehr faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the round of 32. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • USA Athletics Lehr had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

22. Top Gun National Davis-Shanks (MO)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 32
  • Run Differential: -20
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 22nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Top Gun National Davis-Shanks faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -20 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Top Gun National Davis-Shanks continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Top Gun National Davis-Shanks had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

23. Lady Dukes Perkins/Lamar (TN)

• Pool C Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 22
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Run Differential: +4
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool C

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 23rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Lady Dukes Perkins/Lamar had a solid showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a +4 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Lady Dukes Perkins/Lamar faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the round of 32. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Lady Dukes Perkins/Lamar had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

24. Firecrackers Premier RTY (CA)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 8
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -26
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 24th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Firecrackers Premier RTY faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -26 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers Premier RTY continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers Premier RTY had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

25. Oklahoma Athletics National Madden/Davis (OK)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 15
  • Runs Allowed: 17
  • Run Differential: -2
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 25th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Oklahoma Athletics National Madden/Davis faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -2 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Oklahoma Athletics National Madden/Davis continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Oklahoma Athletics National Madden/Davis had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

26. Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose (NE)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 19
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -11
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 26th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -11 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Nebraska Gold National Butler/Jarose had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

27. BSC Bengals Briggs R (CA)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 22
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Run Differential: -2
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 27th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: BSC Bengals Briggs R faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -2 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, BSC Bengals Briggs R continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • BSC Bengals Briggs R had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

28. Firecrackers Vines (CA)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Run Differential: -11
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 28th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Firecrackers Vines faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -11 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers Vines managed to secure a win, but their overall struggles continued, leading to an early exit.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers Vines had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

29. Corona Angels Howard (CA)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 44
  • Run Differential: -28
  • Pool Standings: 8th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 29th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Corona Angels Howard faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -28 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Corona Angels Howard continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Corona Angels Howard had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

30. OC Batbusters Lara (CA)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -27
  • Pool Standings: 7th place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 30th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: OC Batbusters Lara faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -27 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, OC Batbusters Lara continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • OC Batbusters Lara had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

31. Top Gun Burt (KY)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 2-2-1
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Run Differential: +3
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 31st Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Top Gun Burt had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-2-1 record and a +3 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Top Gun Burt faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Top Gun Burt had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

32. Atlanta Vipers Premier White (GA)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 25
  • Run Differential: -4
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 32nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Atlanta Vipers Premier White faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -4 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Atlanta Vipers Premier White continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Atlanta Vipers Premier White had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

33. Rock Gold Manetta (FL)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 1-3-1
  • Runs Scored: 19
  • Runs Allowed: 25
  • Run Differential: -6
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 33rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Rock Gold Manetta faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-3-1 record and a -6 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Rock Gold Manetta continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Rock Gold Manetta had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

34. Nationals Garner/Kennedy (NC)

• Pool K Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 27
  • Runs Allowed: 29
  • Run Differential: -2
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool K

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 34th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Nationals Garner/Kennedy faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -2 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Nationals Garner/Kennedy continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Nationals Garner/Kennedy had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

35. Impact Caymol (GA)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 23
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Run Differential: +5
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 15
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 35th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Impact Caymol had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 3-2 record and a +5 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Impact Caymol faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Impact Caymol had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

36. Fury Premier Moyer/Perry (TN)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 4-1
  • Runs Scored: 28
  • Runs Allowed: 10
  • Run Differential: +18
  • Pool Standings: 2nd place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 36th Place

• Analysis:

  • Strong Pool Play Performance: Fury Premier Moyer/Perry had a solid showing in pool play, finishing with a 4-1 record and a +18 run differential. Their strong play on both sides of the ball positioned them well for the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Fury Premier Moyer/Perry faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Fury Premier Moyer/Perry had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

37. Select Fastpitch National Bower (KS)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 15
  • Runs Allowed: 17
  • Run Differential: -2
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 37th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Select Fastpitch National Bower faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -2 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Select Fastpitch National Bower continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Select Fastpitch National Bower had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

38. Tulsa Elite National 26/27 (AR)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 38
  • Run Differential: -24
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 38th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Tulsa Elite National 26/27 faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -24 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Tulsa Elite National 26/27 continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tulsa Elite National 26/27 had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

39. BSC Bengals Nichols (CA)

• Pool B Stats:

  • Record: 1-3-1
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 25
  • Run Differential: -4
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool B

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 39th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: BSC Bengals Nichols faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-3-1 record and a -4 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, BSC Bengals Nichols advanced to the quarterfinals but faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • BSC Bengals Nichols had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

40. Top Gun National (MO)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 31
  • Runs Allowed: 27
  • Run Differential: +4
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 40th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Top Gun National had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 3-2 record and a +4 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Top Gun National faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Top Gun National had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

41. Georgia Impact Caymol (GA)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 23
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Run Differential: +5
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 15
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 41st Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Georgia Impact Caymol had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 3-2 record and a +5 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Georgia Impact Caymol faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Georgia Impact Caymol had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

42. Building Champions Peppers/Wallace (KS)

• Pool B Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 20
  • Runs Allowed: 47
  • Run Differential: -27
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool B

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 42nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Building Champions Peppers/Wallace faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -27 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Building Champions Peppers/Wallace continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Building Champions Peppers/Wallace had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

43. Arizona Storm Elite Sheehan (AZ)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Run Differential: -5
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 43rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Arizona Storm Elite Sheehan faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -5 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Arizona Storm Elite Sheehan advanced to the quarterfinals but faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Arizona Storm Elite Sheehan had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

44. PA Strikers Augustus (PA)

• Pool M Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 40
  • Run Differential: -31
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool M

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 44th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: PA Strikers Augustus faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -31 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, PA Strikers Augustus continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • PA Strikers Augustus had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

45. Team NC Bowman (NC)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 27
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Run Differential: +7
  • Pool Standings: 2nd place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 45th Place

• Analysis:

  • Strong Pool Play Performance: Team NC Bowman had a solid showing in pool play, finishing with a 3-2 record and a +7 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Team NC Bowman faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Team NC Bowman had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

46. All American Sports Academy Merrida/Bryson (CA)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 21
  • Run Differential: -12
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 46th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: All American Sports Academy Merrida/Bryson faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -12 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, All American Sports Academy Merrida/Bryson continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • All American Sports Academy Merrida/Bryson had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

47. Carolina Cardinals Helms (NC)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 31
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 47th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Carolina Cardinals Helms faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Carolina Cardinals Helms continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Carolina Cardinals Helms had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

48. Florida Power Black (FL)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 35
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 48th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Florida Power Black faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Florida Power Black continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Florida Power Black had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

49. MN Renegades Gold (MN)

• Pool C Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 36
  • Run Differential: -19
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool C

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 49th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: MN Renegades Gold faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -19 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, MN Renegades Gold continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • MN Renegades Gold had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

50. Top Gun National (MO)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 35
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 50th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Top Gun National faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Top Gun National continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Top Gun National had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

51. Colorado Styxx Premiere – Uhler (CO)

• Pool K Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Run Differential: -8
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool K

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 51st Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Colorado Styxx Premiere – Uhler faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -8 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Colorado Styxx Premiere – Uhler continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Colorado Styxx Premiere – Uhler had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

52. USA Athletics Lehr (CA)

• Pool C Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 19
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -11
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool C

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 52nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: USA Athletics Lehr faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -11 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, USA Athletics Lehr continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • USA Athletics Lehr had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

53. PA Chaos 14U Premier (PA)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 32
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 53rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: PA Chaos 14U Premier faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, PA Chaos 14U Premier continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • PA Chaos 14U Premier had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

54. Tampa Mustangs Wiegand (FL)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Run Differential: -14
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 54th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Tampa Mustangs Wiegand faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -14 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Tampa Mustangs Wiegand continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tampa Mustangs Wiegand had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

55. Texas Blaze Gold (TX)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 15
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -15
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 55th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Texas Blaze Gold faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -15 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Texas Blaze Gold continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Blaze Gold had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

56. Tampa Mustangs Bell (FL)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Run Differential: -2
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 56th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Tampa Mustangs Bell faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -2 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Tampa Mustangs Bell continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tampa Mustangs Bell had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

57. Colorado Stars Macias (CO)

• Pool B Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -14
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool B

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 8
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 57th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Colorado Stars Macias faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -14 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Colorado Stars Macias continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Colorado Stars Macias had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

58. Fury Platinum 14U (GA)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -21
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 58th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Fury Platinum 14U faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -21 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Fury Platinum 14U continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Fury Platinum 14U had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

59. Texas Elite 14U Premier (TX)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 15
  • Runs Allowed: 17
  • Run Differential: -2
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 59th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Texas Elite 14U Premier faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -2 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Texas Elite 14U Premier continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Elite 14U Premier had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

60. BSC Bengals Maroon (CA)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 15
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -19
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 60th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: BSC Bengals Maroon faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -19 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, BSC Bengals Maroon continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • BSC Bengals Maroon had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

61. New Jersey Intensity (NJ)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -21
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 61st Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: New Jersey Intensity faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -21 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, New Jersey Intensity continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • New Jersey Intensity had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

62. Arizona Storm Premier (AZ)

• Pool M Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 40
  • Run Differential: -31
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool M

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 62nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Arizona Storm Premier faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -31 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Arizona Storm Premier continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Arizona Storm Premier had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

63. Colorado Styxx (CO)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -20
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 63rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Colorado Styxx faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -20 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Colorado Styxx continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Colorado Styxx had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

64. Impact Caymol (GA)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 23
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Run Differential: +5
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 15
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 64th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Impact Caymol had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 3-2 record and a +5 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Impact Caymol faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Impact Caymol had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

65. Corona Angels Howard (CA)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 44
  • Run Differential: -28
  • Pool Standings: 8th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 65th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Corona Angels Howard faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -28 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Corona Angels Howard continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Corona Angels Howard had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

66. Texas Glory National (TX)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 3-2
  • Runs Scored: 26
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Run Differential: 0
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 66th Place

• Analysis:

  • Balanced Pool Play Performance: Texas Glory National had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 3-2 record and an equal number of runs scored and allowed. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Texas Glory National faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Glory National had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

67. Minnesota A’s 16U National (MN)

• Pool C Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 36
  • Run Differential: -22
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool C

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 67th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Minnesota A’s 16U National faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -22 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Minnesota A’s 16U National continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Minnesota A’s 16U National had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

68. Select Fastpitch National Burns (MO)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -21
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 68th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Select Fastpitch National Burns faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -21 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Select Fastpitch National Burns continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Select Fastpitch National Burns had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

69. Firecrackers Premier (CA)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Run Differential: -5
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 69th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Firecrackers Premier faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -5 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers Premier advanced to the quarterfinals but faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers Premier had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

70. Beverly Bandits Premier Sanders (IL)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -16
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 70th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Beverly Bandits Premier Sanders faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -16 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Beverly Bandits Premier Sanders continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Beverly Bandits Premier Sanders had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

71. Missouri Bombers Holley (MO)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 25
  • Run Differential: -4
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 71st Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Missouri Bombers Holley had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -4 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Missouri Bombers Holley faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the round of 32. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Missouri Bombers Holley had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

72. Oklahoma Athletics Premier Madden/Davis (OK)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 15
  • Runs Allowed: 17
  • Run Differential: -2
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 72nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Oklahoma Athletics Premier Madden/Davis faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -2 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Oklahoma Athletics Premier Madden/Davis continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Oklahoma Athletics Premier Madden/Davis had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

73. Tennessee Elite (TN)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Run Differential: -4
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 16
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 73rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Tennessee Elite had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -4 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Tennessee Elite faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tennessee Elite had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

74. Athletics Mercado – Valdez (CA)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 19
  • Runs Allowed: 17
  • Run Differential: +2
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 74th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Athletics Mercado – Valdez had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a +2 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Athletics Mercado – Valdez faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Athletics Mercado – Valdez had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

75. Texas Glory (TX)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 21
  • Run Differential: -12
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 75th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Texas Glory faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -12 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Texas Glory continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Glory had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

76. Firecrackers RTY (CA)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 19
  • Run Differential: -6
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 76th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Firecrackers RTY faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -6 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers RTY continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers RTY had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

77. Corona Angels Tyson (CA)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 25
  • Run Differential: -4
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 77th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Corona Angels Tyson had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -4 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Corona Angels Tyson faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Corona Angels Tyson had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

78. Oklahoma Athletics Madden (OK)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -17
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 78th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Oklahoma Athletics Madden faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -17 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Oklahoma Athletics Madden continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Oklahoma Athletics Madden had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

79. Texas Bombers STX 14U (TX)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Run Differential: +3
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 18
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 79th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: Texas Bombers STX 14U had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a +3 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, Texas Bombers STX 14U faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Bombers STX 14U had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

80. Washington Ladyhawks Zender (WA)

• Pool F Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool F

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 80th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Washington Ladyhawks Zender faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Washington Ladyhawks Zender continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Washington Ladyhawks Zender had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

81. Lady Lightning Gold Futures Holbrook (NC)

• Pool D Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -13
  • Pool Standings: 7th place in Pool D

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 81st Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Lady Lightning Gold Futures Holbrook faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -13 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Lady Lightning Gold Futures Holbrook continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Lady Lightning Gold Futures Holbrook had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

82. EC Bullets May (GA)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 26
  • Run Differential: -5
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-2
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 82nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: EC Bullets May faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -5 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, EC Bullets May advanced to the quarterfinals but faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • EC Bullets May had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

83. Gametime Stars 2024 (OK)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 23
  • Run Differential: -5
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 83rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Gametime Stars 2024 faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -5 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Gametime Stars 2024 continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Gametime Stars 2024 had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

84. PA Chaos (PA)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Run Differential: -3
  • Pool Standings: 3rd place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 16
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 5
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in quarterfinals

• Overall Placement: 84th Place

• Analysis:

  • Solid Pool Play Performance: PA Chaos had a balanced showing in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -3 run differential. Their balanced play earned them a competitive spot in the bracket rounds.
  • Bracket Play Challenges: In the bracket rounds, PA Chaos faced tougher competition, leading to their elimination in the quarterfinals. Their performance was competitive, but they were unable to advance further.

• Overall Summary:

  • PA Chaos had a respectable tournament, performing well in both pool and bracket play. Their early exit in the bracket rounds highlights the need for greater consistency to compete against the top teams.

85. Firecrackers Leles (CA)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 32
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 85th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Firecrackers Leles faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 0-5 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers Leles managed to secure a win, but their overall struggles continued, leading to an early exit.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers Leles had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

86. Fury Platinum – 14U Black (GA)

• Pool J Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -21
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool J

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 86th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Fury Platinum – 14U Black faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -21 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Fury Platinum – 14U Black continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Fury Platinum – 14U Black had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

87. Texas Bombers STX (TX)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Run Differential: -6
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 87th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Texas Bombers STX faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -6 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Texas Bombers STX continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Bombers STX had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

88. TN Mojo 2024/2025 (TN)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 21
  • Runs Allowed: 25
  • Run Differential: -4
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 20
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 88th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: TN Mojo 2024/2025 faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -4 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, TN Mojo 2024/2025 continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • TN Mojo 2024/2025 had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

89. Tulsa Elite (OK)

• Pool M Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 35
  • Run Differential: -23
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool M

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 89th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Tulsa Elite faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -23 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Tulsa Elite continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tulsa Elite had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

90. Florida Power Black (FL)

• Pool M Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 40
  • Run Differential: -31
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool M

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 90th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Florida Power Black faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -31 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Florida Power Black continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Florida Power Black had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

91. Firecrackers Premier – Leles (CA)

• Pool K Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 35
  • Run Differential: -26
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool K

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 91st Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Firecrackers Premier – Leles faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -26 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers Premier – Leles continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers Premier – Leles had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

92. PA Chaos 2026 (PA)

• Pool M Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 32
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool M

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 92nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: PA Chaos 2026 faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, PA Chaos 2026 continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • PA Chaos 2026 had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

93. Firecrackers Premier Allen (CA)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 23
  • Run Differential: -5
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 93rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Firecrackers Premier Allen faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -5 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers Premier Allen continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers Premier Allen had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

94. Tampa Mustangs Schmitt (FL)

• Pool E Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 32
  • Run Differential: -15
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool E

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 94th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Tampa Mustangs Schmitt faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -15 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Tampa Mustangs Schmitt continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Tampa Mustangs Schmitt had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

95. Texas Glory Gold (TX)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 95th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Texas Glory Gold faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Texas Glory Gold continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Glory Gold had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

96. Firecrackers RTY 14U (CA)

• Pool G Stats:

  • Record: 2-3
  • Runs Scored: 18
  • Runs Allowed: 24
  • Run Differential: -6
  • Pool Standings: 4th place in Pool G

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 96th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Firecrackers RTY 14U faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 2-3 record and a -6 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Firecrackers RTY 14U continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Firecrackers RTY 14U had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

97. Texas Blaze 14U Premier (TX)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 30
  • Run Differential: -16
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 1-3
  • Runs Scored: 12
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 32

• Overall Placement: 97th Place

• Analysis:

  • Challenges in Pool Play: Texas Blaze 14U Premier faced challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -16 run differential. Their struggles were particularly evident in their defense.
  • Early Bracket Exit: In the bracket rounds, Texas Blaze 14U Premier continued to face difficulties, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 32.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Blaze 14U Premier had a challenging tournament, with difficulties in both pool and bracket play. The experience gained will be valuable as they look to improve and perform better in future events.

98. Georgia Impact National Sullivan (GA)

• Pool K Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 14
  • Runs Allowed: 32
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool K

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 10
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 98th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Georgia Impact National Sullivan faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Georgia Impact National Sullivan continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Georgia Impact National Sullivan had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

99. Oklahoma Athletics Madden (OK)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 13
  • Runs Allowed: 32
  • Run Differential: -19
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 99th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Oklahoma Athletics Madden faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -19 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Oklahoma Athletics Madden continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Oklahoma Athletics Madden had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

100. Texas Blaze 2026 (TX)

• Pool A Stats:

  • Record: 1-4
  • Runs Scored: 17
  • Runs Allowed: 35
  • Run Differential: -18
  • Pool Standings: 5th place in Pool A

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 11
  • Runs Allowed: 28
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 100th Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Texas Blaze 2026 faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with a 1-4 record and a -18 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Texas Blaze 2026 continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Texas Blaze 2026 had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

101. Select Fastpitch National (MO)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -25
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 101st Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Select Fastpitch National faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -25 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Select Fastpitch National continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Select Fastpitch National had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

102. Fury Platinum – 14U National (GA)

• Pool L Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 35
  • Run Differential: -26
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool L

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 102nd Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Fury Platinum – 14U National faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -26 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Fury Platinum – 14U National continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Fury Platinum – 14U National had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

103. Select Fastpitch National (MO)

• Pool H Stats:

  • Record: 0-5
  • Runs Scored: 9
  • Runs Allowed: 34
  • Run Differential: -25
  • Pool Standings: 6th place in Pool H

• Bracket Stats:

  • Record: 0-4
  • Runs Scored: 7
  • Runs Allowed: 22
  • Rounds Played: 4
  • Final Placement: Eliminated in round of 64

• Overall Placement: 103rd Place

• Analysis:

  • Struggles in Pool Play: Select Fastpitch National faced significant challenges in pool play, finishing with an 0-5 record and a -25 run differential. Their struggles on both sides of the ball were evident.
  • Bracket Play Performance: In the bracket rounds, Select Fastpitch National continued to struggle, leading to an early exit. Despite their efforts, they were unable to advance past the round of 64.

• Overall Summary:

  • Select Fastpitch National had a tough tournament, with challenges in both pool and bracket play. The experience, however, will be valuable as they look to regroup and improve in future events.

Texas

• Number of Teams: 19
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 1st Place (Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16U)
  • Average Placement: 40th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 3-2
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 4 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16U:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 8-0, Champion
    • Summary: Dominant performance, secured the championship.
  • Texas Bombers STX 14U:
    • Pool Play Record: 2-3
    • Bracket Play: 2-3, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing but fell short in the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Texas teams had a strong presence, with several teams performing well in both pool and bracket play. The Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16U were particularly dominant, securing the championship.

California

• Number of Teams: 15
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 2nd Place (Universal Fastpitch Macias)
  • Average Placement: 50th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 2-3
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 4 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Universal Fastpitch Macias:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 6-1, Runner-Up
    • Summary: Strong overall performance, finishing as the runner-up.
  • Firecrackers Premier RTY:
    • Pool Play Record: 2-3
    • Bracket Play: 2-2, Round of 16
    • Summary: Competitive team with a solid run in bracket play.
• Summary: California teams had mixed results, with some strong performances like Universal Fastpitch Macias, who reached the final. However, many teams struggled in both pool and bracket play.

Georgia

• Number of Teams: 12
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 4th Place (Georgia Impact Taylor)
  • Average Placement: 30th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 3-2
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 5 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Georgia Impact Taylor:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 6-2, Semifinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the semifinals.
  • Impact Premier Sullivan:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-1-1
    • Bracket Play: 4-1, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Performed well but was stopped in the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Georgia teams were competitive overall, with strong showings in both pool and bracket play. Georgia Impact Taylor stood out with a deep run into the semifinals.

Florida

• Number of Teams: 11
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 5th Place (Tampa Mustangs Fowler)
  • Average Placement: 45th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 2-3
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 4 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Tampa Mustangs Fowler:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong run, reaching the quarterfinals.
  • Tampa Mustangs Bell:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-2
    • Bracket Play: 4-1, Round of 16
    • Summary: Competitive performance, but fell in the round of 16.
• Summary: Florida teams had a solid presence, with a few teams making deep runs in bracket play. However, overall performance was average, with many teams struggling in pool play.

Oklahoma

• Number of Teams: 9
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 8th Place (Oklahoma Athletics Madden/Knight)
  • Average Placement: 55th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 2-3
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 4 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Oklahoma Athletics Madden/Knight:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Consistent performance, reaching the quarterfinals.
  • Impact Caymol:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-2
    • Bracket Play: 4-1, Round of 16
    • Summary: Performed well but was stopped in the round of 16.
• Summary: Oklahoma teams had a challenging tournament overall, with only a few teams advancing past the early rounds of bracket play. The Oklahoma Athletics Madden/Knight team was the standout, reaching the quarterfinals.

Illinois

• Number of Teams: 8
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 6th Place (Beverly Bandits Freeland)
  • Average Placement: 35th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 3-2
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 5 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Beverly Bandits Freeland:
    • Pool Play Record: 5-0
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Semifinals
    • Summary: Excellent showing, reaching the semifinals.
  • Beverly Bandits Hardin:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 3-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong performance, but fell in the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Illinois teams were competitive, with strong performances in both pool and bracket play. The Beverly Bandits Freeland team had an excellent run, finishing in the top 6.

North Carolina

• Number of Teams: 7
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 7th Place (Lady Lightning Gold Corn)
  • Average Placement: 48th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 2-3
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 4 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Lady Lightning Gold Corn:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the quarterfinals.
  • Team NC Bowman:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-2
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Round of 16
    • Summary: Competitive performance, but fell in the round of 16.
• Summary: North Carolina teams had a decent showing, with some teams advancing far into the bracket rounds. The Lady Lightning Gold Corn team was the standout, finishing in the top 8.

Nebraska

• Number of Teams: 5
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 3rd Place (Nebraska Gold deMontel)
  • Average Placement: 20th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 4-1
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 6 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Nebraska Gold deMontel:
    • Pool Play Record: 5-0
    • Bracket Play: 6-1, Semifinals
    • Summary: Excellent performance, finishing in the top 3.
  • Nebraska Gold Perkins:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-1-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Nebraska teams had a strong tournament overall, with the top performers reaching the semifinals and quarterfinals. Nebraska Gold deMontel was particularly impressive, finishing in 3rd place.

Tennessee

• Number of Teams: 4
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 2nd Place (Tennessee Mojo Lewis)
  • Average Placement: 28th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 3-2
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 5 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Tennessee Mojo Lewis:
    • Pool Play Record: 5-0
    • Bracket Play: 7-1, Runner-Up
    • Summary: Strong overall performance, finishing as the runner-up.
  • Fury Premier Moyer/Perry:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Competitive showing, but fell in the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Tennessee teams performed well overall, with Tennessee Mojo Lewis making a deep run to the final. Other teams also had solid showings, reaching the later stages of bracket play.

Alabama

• Number of Teams: 3
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 5th Place (Birmingham Thunderbolts Premier Thompson)
  • Average Placement: 35th Place
  • Average Pool Play Record: 3-2
  • Average Bracket Play Rounds: 5 rounds
• Top Performers:
  • Birmingham Thunderbolts Premier Thompson:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Alabama teams had a competitive showing, with Birmingham Thunderbolts Premier Thompson leading the way with a top 5 finish. Overall, the teams performed well in both pool and bracket play.

Hotshots

• Number of Teams: 5
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 1st Place (Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16U)
  • Average Placement: 25th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 6 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 4-1 on average
  • Consistency: High (multiple strong performers)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Hotshots National Naudin/Villegas 16U:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 8-0, Champion
    • Summary: Dominant performance, secured the championship.
  • Hotshots National Nelson:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-0-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong performance, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: The Hotshots organization had an outstanding tournament, with one team securing the championship and others performing strongly in both pool and bracket play. The overall consistency and success across multiple teams highlight the strength of the organization.

Nebraska Gold

• Number of Teams: 5
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 3rd Place (Nebraska Gold deMontel)
  • Average Placement: 20th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 6 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 4-1 on average
  • Consistency: High (multiple strong performers)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Nebraska Gold deMontel:
    • Pool Play Record: 5-0
    • Bracket Play: 6-1, Semifinals
    • Summary: Excellent performance, finishing in the top 3.
  • Nebraska Gold Perkins:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-1-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Nebraska Gold teams had a strong tournament overall, with top performers reaching the semifinals and quarterfinals. Nebraska Gold deMontel was particularly impressive, finishing in 3rd place, highlighting the organization’s depth and competitiveness.

Universal Fastpitch

• Number of Teams: 2
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 2nd Place (Universal Fastpitch Macias)
  • Average Placement: 20th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 6 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 4-1 on average
  • Consistency: High (top team performed exceptionally)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ (5.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Universal Fastpitch Macias:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 6-1, Runner-Up
    • Summary: Strong overall performance, finishing as the runner-up.
• Summary: The Universal Fastpitch organization had a highly successful tournament, with the Macias team leading the way with a runner-up finish. The performance reflects the organization’s competitiveness at a high level.

Beverly Bandits

• Number of Teams: 6
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 6th Place (Beverly Bandits Freeland)
  • Average Placement: 35th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 5 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 3-2 on average
  • Consistency: Moderate (a couple of strong performers)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Beverly Bandits Freeland:
    • Pool Play Record: 5-0
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Semifinals
    • Summary: Excellent showing, reaching the semifinals.
  • Beverly Bandits Hardin:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 3-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong performance, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: The Beverly Bandits organization demonstrated strong competitive play, particularly with the Freeland and Hardin teams. Their performance in both pool and bracket play reflects a well-rounded and highly competitive program.

Georgia Impact

• Number of Teams: 4
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 4th Place (Georgia Impact Taylor)
  • Average Placement: 30th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 5 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 3-2 on average
  • Consistency: High (all teams competitive)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Georgia Impact Taylor:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 6-2, Semifinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the semifinals.
  • Georgia Impact National Sullivan:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-1-1
    • Bracket Play: 4-1, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Competitive performance, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: Georgia Impact teams were highly competitive, with strong performances in both pool and bracket play. The Taylor team led the way with a deep run into the semifinals, reflecting the organization’s overall strength.

Lady Lightning Gold

• Number of Teams: 3
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 7th Place (Lady Lightning Gold Corn)
  • Average Placement: 40th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 5 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 3-2 on average
  • Consistency: Moderate (one strong performer, others average)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Lady Lightning Gold Corn:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: The Lady Lightning Gold organization had a solid showing, with the Corn team leading the way with a deep run in bracket play. Overall, the teams were competitive, with consistent performances across the board.

Tampa Mustangs

• Number of Teams: 4
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 5th Place (Tampa Mustangs Fowler)
  • Average Placement: 30th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 5 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 3-2 on average
  • Consistency: High (multiple strong performers)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Tampa Mustangs Fowler:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the quarterfinals.
  • Tampa Mustangs Bell:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-2
    • Bracket Play: 4-1, Round of 16
    • Summary: Competitive performance, but fell in the round of 16.
• Summary: Tampa Mustangs teams had a solid presence, with several teams making deep runs in bracket play. Overall, the teams were competitive, with consistent performances across the board.

Birmingham Thunderbolts

• Number of Teams: 3
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 5th Place (Birmingham Thunderbolts Premier Thompson)
  • Average Placement: 35th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 5 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 3-2 on average
  • Consistency: Moderate (one strong performer, others average)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ (4.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Birmingham Thunderbolts Premier Thompson:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Strong showing, reaching the quarterfinals.
• Summary: The Birmingham Thunderbolts organization had a competitive showing, with the Premier Thompson team leading the way with a top 5 finish. Overall, the teams performed well in both pool and bracket play.

Oklahoma Athletics

• Number of Teams: 7
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 8th Place (Oklahoma Athletics Madden/Knight)
  • Average Placement: 45th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 4 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 2-3 on average
  • Consistency: Low (one top performer, others struggled)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐ (3.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Oklahoma Athletics Madden/Knight:
    • Pool Play Record: 4-1
    • Bracket Play: 5-2, Quarterfinals
    • Summary: Consistent performance, reaching the quarterfinals.
  • Oklahoma Athletics Madden/Brown:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-1-1
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Round of 16
    • Summary: Solid showing, but fell in the round of 16.
• Summary: The Oklahoma Athletics organization had mixed results, with some teams advancing far into bracket play while others struggled. The Madden/Knight team stood out as a top performer, showcasing the organization’s competitive edge.

Firecrackers

• Number of Teams: 8
• Overall Performance:
  • Best Placement: 16th Place (Firecrackers Leles)
  • Average Placement: 50th Place
  • Bracket Play Depth: 4 rounds on average
  • Pool Play Record: 2-3 on average
  • Consistency: Low (one top performer, others struggled)
• Star Rating: ⭐⭐⭐ (3.0)
• Top Performers:
  • Firecrackers Leles:
    • Pool Play Record: 3-2
    • Bracket Play: 4-2, Round of 16
    • Summary: Competed well but faced challenges in the round of 16.
  • Firecrackers Premier RTY:
    • Pool Play Record: 2-3
    • Bracket Play: 2-2, Round of 32
    • Summary: Competitive but fell short in the round of 32.
• Summary: The Firecrackers organization had mixed results, with some teams making competitive runs in bracket play while others struggled. The Leles team was the standout performer, reaching the round of 16.