# | Team | MP | W | D | L | GF | GA | GD | Pts | PPG | Last 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Union Omaha | 28 | 14 | 9 | 5 | 44 | 22 | +22 | 51 | 1.82 | |
2 | Greenville Triumph | 28 | 12 | 9 | 7 | 36 | 29 | +7 | 45 | 1.61 | |
3 | Chattanooga Red Wolves | 28 | 11 | 11 | 6 | 37 | 29 | +8 | 44 | 1.57 | |
4 | North Texas | 28 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 40 | 32 | +8 | 40 | 1.43 | |
5 | FC Tucson | 28 | 11 | 7 | 10 | 44 | 42 | +2 | 40 | 1.43 | |
6 | Richmond Kickers | 28 | 11 | 7 | 10 | 35 | 36 | -1 | 40 | 1.43 | |
7 | Toronto II | 28 | 10 | 8 | 10 | 34 | 32 | +2 | 38 | 1.36 | |
8 | New England II | 28 | 11 | 4 | 13 | 33 | 39 | -6 | 37 | 1.32 | |
9 | Forward Madison | 28 | 8 | 12 | 8 | 32 | 34 | -2 | 36 | 1.29 | |
10 | Inter Miami II | 28 | 8 | 7 | 13 | 40 | 49 | -9 | 31 | 1.11 | |
11 | South Georgia Tormenta FC | 28 | 8 | 6 | 14 | 36 | 47 | -11 | 30 | 1.07 | |
12 | North Carolina FC | 28 | 7 | 4 | 17 | 30 | 50 | -20 | 25 | 0.89 |
# | Team | MP | W | D | L | GF | GA | GD | Pts | PPG | Last 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Union Omaha | 14 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 23 | 12 | +11 | 25 | 1.79 | |
2 | Greenville Triumph | 14 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 21 | 15 | +6 | 23 | 1.64 | |
3 | Chattanooga Red Wolves | 14 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 21 | 15 | +6 | 26 | 1.86 | |
4 | North Texas | 14 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 28 | 14 | +14 | 24 | 1.71 | |
5 | FC Tucson | 14 | 6 | 2 | 6 | 23 | 21 | +2 | 20 | 1.43 | |
6 | Richmond Kickers | 14 | 8 | 5 | 1 | 19 | 11 | +8 | 29 | 2.07 | |
7 | Toronto II | 14 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 18 | 11 | +7 | 25 | 1.79 | |
8 | New England II | 14 | 8 | 2 | 4 | 18 | 13 | +5 | 26 | 1.86 | |
9 | Forward Madison | 14 | 6 | 6 | 2 | 16 | 13 | +3 | 24 | 1.71 | |
10 | Inter Miami II | 14 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 23 | 24 | -1 | 17 | 1.21 | |
11 | South Georgia Tormenta FC | 14 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 17 | 20 | -3 | 18 | 1.29 | |
12 | North Carolina FC | 14 | 5 | 0 | 9 | 20 | 25 | -5 | 15 | 1.07 |
# | Team | MP | W | D | L | GF | GA | GD | Pts | PPG | Last 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Union Omaha | 14 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 21 | 10 | +11 | 26 | 1.86 | |
2 | Greenville Triumph | 14 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 15 | 14 | +1 | 22 | 1.57 | |
3 | Chattanooga Red Wolves | 14 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 16 | 14 | +2 | 18 | 1.29 | |
4 | North Texas | 14 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 12 | 18 | -6 | 16 | 1.14 | |
5 | FC Tucson | 14 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 21 | 21 | 0 | 20 | 1.43 | |
6 | Richmond Kickers | 14 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 16 | 25 | -9 | 11 | 0.79 | |
7 | Toronto II | 14 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 16 | 21 | -5 | 13 | 0.93 | |
8 | New England II | 14 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 15 | 26 | -11 | 11 | 0.79 | |
9 | Forward Madison | 14 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 16 | 21 | -5 | 12 | 0.86 | |
10 | Inter Miami II | 14 | 4 | 2 | 8 | 17 | 25 | -8 | 14 | 1.00 | |
11 | South Georgia Tormenta FC | 14 | 3 | 3 | 8 | 19 | 27 | -8 | 12 | 0.86 | |
12 | North Carolina FC | 14 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 10 | 25 | -15 | 10 | 0.71 |
Inter Miami II currently ranks 10th in the USL League One among all 1 clubs competing in the championship - regardless of the stages of the tournament.
In 28 matches played thus far, Inter Miami II has a record of 8 wins, 7 draws, and 13 defeats, and an average of 1.11 points per match.
These statistics are crucial in accurately measuring their overall performance during the championship. They can help give a better idea of whether the team is a true title contender or if they are not quite capable of competing with the very top teams for the championship.
Meanwhile, here is more information about Inter Miami II’s ongoing campaign in the USL League One:
These five players currently lead the Inter Miami II standings for most goals in the season:
Topping the Inter Miami II table for most assists are these five players:
Switch to
Would you like to change to ?
Login or Signup to add to favourites
You can login with social media
Not registered yet? Create an Account.