Season
2016
Country
USA
# | Team | MP | BTTS | BTTS% |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 |
![]() Phoenix Rising |
30 | 20 | 67% |
2 |
![]() Penn FC |
30 | 21 | 70% |
3 |
![]() Toronto II |
30 | 20 | 67% |
4 |
![]() Tacoma Defiance |
30 | 18 | 60% |
5 |
![]() Tulsa Roughnecks |
30 | 14 | 47% |
6 |
![]() Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
30 | 18 | 60% |
7 |
![]() OKC Energy |
32 | 14 | 44% |
8 |
![]() LA Galaxy II |
31 | 19 | 61% |
9 |
![]() Sacramento Republic |
31 | 14 | 45% |
10 |
![]() FC Cincinnati |
31 | 19 | 61% |
11 |
![]() Philadelphia Union II |
30 | 16 | 53% |
12 |
![]() Rio Grande Valley |
31 | 10 | 32% |
13 |
![]() Charleston Battery |
32 | 20 | 63% |
14 |
![]() Charlotte Independence |
31 | 17 | 55% |
15 |
![]() New York RB II |
34 | 16 | 47% |
16 |
![]() Colorado Springs |
31 | 14 | 45% |
17 |
![]() Louisville City |
33 | 16 | 48% |
18 |
![]() Real Monarchs |
30 | 14 | 47% |
19 |
![]() Saint Louis |
30 | 18 | 60% |
20 |
![]() Richmond Kickers |
31 | 13 | 42% |
21 |
![]() Portland Timbers II |
30 | 17 | 57% |
22 |
![]() Orange County |
32 | 16 | 50% |
23 |
![]() San Antonio |
30 | 16 | 53% |
24 |
![]() Sporting KC II |
34 | 20 | 59% |
25 |
![]() Whitecaps II |
33 | 22 | 67% |
26 |
![]() Orlando City II |
31 | 19 | 61% |
27 |
![]() Rochester Rhinos |
32 | 19 | 59% |
28 |
![]() Wilmington Hammerheads |
30 | 17 | 57% |
29 |
![]() FC Montréal |
30 | 19 | 63% |
# | Team | MP | BTTS | BTTS% |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 |
![]() Phoenix Rising |
15 | 11 | 73% |
2 |
![]() Penn FC |
16 | 14 | 88% |
3 |
![]() Toronto II |
15 | 10 | 67% |
4 |
![]() Tacoma Defiance |
15 | 9 | 60% |
5 |
![]() Tulsa Roughnecks |
15 | 7 | 47% |
6 |
![]() Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
15 | 9 | 60% |
7 |
![]() OKC Energy |
15 | 8 | 53% |
8 |
![]() LA Galaxy II |
15 | 9 | 60% |
9 |
![]() Sacramento Republic |
16 | 8 | 50% |
10 |
![]() FC Cincinnati |
16 | 11 | 69% |
11 |
![]() Philadelphia Union II |
15 | 7 | 47% |
12 |
![]() Rio Grande Valley |
16 | 6 | 38% |
13 |
![]() Charleston Battery |
15 | 8 | 53% |
14 |
![]() Charlotte Independence |
15 | 7 | 47% |
15 |
![]() New York RB II |
18 | 7 | 39% |
16 |
![]() Colorado Springs |
16 | 5 | 31% |
17 |
![]() Louisville City |
17 | 9 | 53% |
18 |
![]() Real Monarchs |
15 | 6 | 40% |
19 |
![]() Saint Louis |
15 | 10 | 67% |
20 |
![]() Richmond Kickers |
15 | 7 | 47% |
21 |
![]() Portland Timbers II |
15 | 11 | 73% |
22 |
![]() Orange County |
15 | 5 | 33% |
23 |
![]() San Antonio |
15 | 9 | 60% |
24 |
![]() Sporting KC II |
18 | 9 | 50% |
25 |
![]() Whitecaps II |
16 | 10 | 63% |
26 |
![]() Orlando City II |
15 | 11 | 73% |
27 |
![]() Rochester Rhinos |
16 | 9 | 56% |
28 |
![]() Wilmington Hammerheads |
15 | 7 | 47% |
29 |
![]() FC Montréal |
15 | 9 | 60% |
# | Team | MP | BTTS | BTTS% |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 |
![]() Phoenix Rising |
15 | 9 | 60% |
2 |
![]() Penn FC |
14 | 7 | 50% |
3 |
![]() Toronto II |
15 | 10 | 67% |
4 |
![]() Tacoma Defiance |
15 | 9 | 60% |
5 |
![]() Tulsa Roughnecks |
15 | 7 | 47% |
6 |
![]() Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
15 | 9 | 60% |
7 |
![]() OKC Energy |
17 | 6 | 35% |
8 |
![]() LA Galaxy II |
16 | 10 | 63% |
9 |
![]() Sacramento Republic |
15 | 6 | 40% |
10 |
![]() FC Cincinnati |
15 | 8 | 53% |
11 |
![]() Philadelphia Union II |
15 | 9 | 60% |
12 |
![]() Rio Grande Valley |
15 | 4 | 27% |
13 |
![]() Charleston Battery |
17 | 12 | 71% |
14 |
![]() Charlotte Independence |
16 | 10 | 63% |
15 |
![]() New York RB II |
16 | 9 | 56% |
16 |
![]() Colorado Springs |
15 | 9 | 60% |
17 |
![]() Louisville City |
16 | 7 | 44% |
18 |
![]() Real Monarchs |
15 | 8 | 53% |
19 |
![]() Saint Louis |
15 | 8 | 53% |
20 |
![]() Richmond Kickers |
16 | 6 | 38% |
21 |
![]() Portland Timbers II |
15 | 6 | 40% |
22 |
![]() Orange County |
17 | 11 | 65% |
23 |
![]() San Antonio |
15 | 7 | 47% |
24 |
![]() Sporting KC II |
16 | 11 | 69% |
25 |
![]() Whitecaps II |
17 | 12 | 71% |
26 |
![]() Orlando City II |
16 | 8 | 50% |
27 |
![]() Rochester Rhinos |
16 | 10 | 63% |
28 |
![]() Wilmington Hammerheads |
15 | 10 | 67% |
29 |
![]() FC Montréal |
15 | 10 | 67% |
The both teams scoring stat is the number of times a team has both scored and conceded a goal in a match. This stat is helpful in determining whether a match has the potential to be a high-scoring affair.
And in FC Montréal’s case, their BTTS statistics in the USL Championship 2016 provide some interesting insights about their offence and defence. Here are the relevant BTTS stats on FC Montréal in the competition:
You can also see FC Montréal’s BTTS stats filtered in terms of where they play, whether it’s at home or away, as well as overall, for a more comprehensive view of the stat all season long.
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.