Miami FC II 0 - 2 Detroit City FC
08.03.2025 - 19:00
Finished
Match Scoring / Conceding First
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Louisville City |
14 | 70% |
| 2 |
New Mexico United |
12 | 67% |
| 3 |
Indy Eleven |
12 | 63% |
| 4 |
North Carolina FC |
12 | 63% |
| 5 |
Sacramento Republic |
11 | 58% |
| 6 |
Orange County |
10 | 56% |
| 7 |
Charleston Battery |
11 | 55% |
| 8 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
11 | 55% |
| 9 |
Phoenix Rising |
10 | 50% |
| 10 |
Miami FC II |
10 | 50% |
| 11 |
El Paso Locomotive |
9 | 47% |
| 12 |
Colorado Springs |
9 | 47% |
| 13 |
San Antonio |
9 | 47% |
| 14 |
Lexington |
9 | 45% |
| 15 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
9 | 45% |
| 16 |
Detroit City FC |
9 | 45% |
| 17 |
Oakland Roots |
8 | 42% |
| 18 |
Monterey Bay |
8 | 38% |
| 19 |
Hartford Athletic |
7 | 37% |
| 20 |
Las Vegas Lights |
6 | 30% |
| 21 |
Loudoun United |
6 | 30% |
| 22 |
Rhode Island |
6 | 30% |
| 23 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
5 | 26% |
| 24 |
Birmingham Legion |
4 | 20% |
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
North Carolina FC |
9 | 90% |
| 2 |
Orange County |
7 | 78% |
| 3 |
New Mexico United |
6 | 75% |
| 4 |
Louisville City |
7 | 70% |
| 5 |
Charleston Battery |
6 | 67% |
| 6 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
7 | 64% |
| 7 |
Detroit City FC |
5 | 63% |
| 8 |
Colorado Springs |
5 | 63% |
| 9 |
Indy Eleven |
6 | 60% |
| 10 |
El Paso Locomotive |
5 | 56% |
| 11 |
Sacramento Republic |
6 | 55% |
| 12 |
San Antonio |
6 | 55% |
| 13 |
Phoenix Rising |
4 | 50% |
| 14 |
Miami FC II |
6 | 50% |
| 15 |
Lexington |
5 | 50% |
| 16 |
Las Vegas Lights |
5 | 45% |
| 17 |
Monterey Bay |
4 | 44% |
| 18 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
4 | 40% |
| 19 |
Hartford Athletic |
4 | 36% |
| 20 |
Loudoun United |
3 | 30% |
| 21 |
Oakland Roots |
3 | 30% |
| 22 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
2 | 25% |
| 23 |
Rhode Island |
2 | 20% |
| 24 |
Birmingham Legion |
2 | 18% |
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Louisville City |
7 | 70% |
| 2 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
7 | 70% |
| 3 |
Indy Eleven |
6 | 67% |
| 4 |
Sacramento Republic |
5 | 63% |
| 5 |
New Mexico United |
6 | 60% |
| 6 |
Oakland Roots |
5 | 56% |
| 7 |
Phoenix Rising |
6 | 50% |
| 8 |
Miami FC II |
4 | 50% |
| 9 |
Charleston Battery |
5 | 45% |
| 10 |
Lexington |
4 | 40% |
| 11 |
El Paso Locomotive |
4 | 40% |
| 12 |
Rhode Island |
4 | 40% |
| 13 |
San Antonio |
3 | 38% |
| 14 |
Hartford Athletic |
3 | 38% |
| 15 |
Colorado Springs |
4 | 36% |
| 16 |
Detroit City FC |
4 | 33% |
| 17 |
Monterey Bay |
4 | 33% |
| 18 |
Orange County |
3 | 33% |
| 19 |
North Carolina FC |
3 | 33% |
| 20 |
Loudoun United |
3 | 30% |
| 21 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
3 | 27% |
| 22 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
2 | 22% |
| 23 |
Birmingham Legion |
2 | 22% |
| 24 |
Las Vegas Lights |
1 | 11% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Birmingham Legion |
16 | 80% |
| 2 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
14 | 73% |
| 3 |
Loudoun United |
14 | 70% |
| 4 |
Rhode Island |
14 | 70% |
| 5 |
Las Vegas Lights |
14 | 70% |
| 6 |
Hartford Athletic |
12 | 63% |
| 7 |
Monterey Bay |
13 | 61% |
| 8 |
Oakland Roots |
11 | 57% |
| 9 |
Detroit City FC |
11 | 55% |
| 10 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
11 | 55% |
| 11 |
Lexington |
11 | 55% |
| 12 |
San Antonio |
10 | 52% |
| 13 |
Colorado Springs |
10 | 52% |
| 14 |
El Paso Locomotive |
10 | 52% |
| 15 |
Phoenix Rising |
10 | 50% |
| 16 |
Miami FC II |
10 | 50% |
| 17 |
Charleston Battery |
9 | 45% |
| 18 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
9 | 45% |
| 19 |
Orange County |
8 | 44% |
| 20 |
Sacramento Republic |
8 | 42% |
| 21 |
North Carolina FC |
7 | 36% |
| 22 |
Indy Eleven |
7 | 36% |
| 23 |
New Mexico United |
6 | 33% |
| 24 |
Louisville City |
6 | 30% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Birmingham Legion |
9 | 81% |
| 2 |
Rhode Island |
8 | 80% |
| 3 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
6 | 75% |
| 4 |
Oakland Roots |
7 | 70% |
| 5 |
Loudoun United |
7 | 70% |
| 6 |
Hartford Athletic |
7 | 63% |
| 7 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
6 | 60% |
| 8 |
Monterey Bay |
5 | 55% |
| 9 |
Las Vegas Lights |
6 | 54% |
| 10 |
Phoenix Rising |
4 | 50% |
| 11 |
Miami FC II |
6 | 50% |
| 12 |
Lexington |
5 | 50% |
| 13 |
San Antonio |
5 | 45% |
| 14 |
Sacramento Republic |
5 | 45% |
| 15 |
El Paso Locomotive |
4 | 44% |
| 16 |
Indy Eleven |
4 | 40% |
| 17 |
Colorado Springs |
3 | 37% |
| 18 |
Detroit City FC |
3 | 37% |
| 19 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
4 | 36% |
| 20 |
Charleston Battery |
3 | 33% |
| 21 |
Louisville City |
3 | 30% |
| 22 |
New Mexico United |
2 | 25% |
| 23 |
Orange County |
2 | 22% |
| 24 |
North Carolina FC |
1 | 10% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Las Vegas Lights |
8 | 88% |
| 2 |
Birmingham Legion |
7 | 77% |
| 3 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
7 | 77% |
| 4 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
8 | 72% |
| 5 |
Loudoun United |
7 | 70% |
| 6 |
Monterey Bay |
8 | 66% |
| 7 |
Detroit City FC |
8 | 66% |
| 8 |
North Carolina FC |
6 | 66% |
| 9 |
Orange County |
6 | 66% |
| 10 |
Colorado Springs |
7 | 63% |
| 11 |
San Antonio |
5 | 62% |
| 12 |
Hartford Athletic |
5 | 62% |
| 13 |
Rhode Island |
6 | 60% |
| 14 |
El Paso Locomotive |
6 | 60% |
| 15 |
Lexington |
6 | 60% |
| 16 |
Charleston Battery |
6 | 54% |
| 17 |
Phoenix Rising |
6 | 50% |
| 18 |
Miami FC II |
4 | 50% |
| 19 |
Oakland Roots |
4 | 44% |
| 20 |
New Mexico United |
4 | 40% |
| 21 |
Sacramento Republic |
3 | 37% |
| 22 |
Indy Eleven |
3 | 33% |
| 23 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
3 | 30% |
| 24 |
Louisville City |
3 | 30% |
This page keeps track of the number of matches a team has scored or conceded the first goal in a match. This helps give you a better idea of what to expect from Miami FC II and Detroit City FC in terms of their tendencies from both an attacking and defensive perspective.
Miami FC II has come out and scored the first goal in 50% of the matches they have played so far in the USL Championship. And on the other side, they have conceded the first goal in 50% of matches.
Meanwhile, Detroit City FC comes into this contest having scored a goal before their opponent in 45% of matches in this campaign. And in terms of giving up the first goal, they have done so in 55% of matches.
This information helps to provide a deeper insight into the two teams’ play in the competition. A higher rate of scoring the first goal indicates a more aggressive side that imposes its will onto its opponents. Similarly, a high rate of conceding the first goal points to a side whose defence struggles to keep things tight at the back.
It should prove useful to study these teams’ tendencies of scoring or conceding first, as well as whether these tendencies change when they play at home or away in USL Championship.