Latest Highlights
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
MLS 2026
| # | GP | W | D | L | DIFF | Goals | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 18 | 12 | 4 | 2 | +21 | 35:14 | 40 | |
| 2 | 18 | 11 | 5 | 2 | +13 | 45:32 | 38 | |
| 3 | 17 | 9 | 3 | 5 | +7 | 28:21 | 30 | |
| 4 | 17 | 9 | 2 | 6 | +9 | 32:23 | 29 | |
| 5 | 18 | 7 | 5 | 6 | +7 | 31:24 | 26 | |
| 6 | 18 | 7 | 5 | 6 | +1 | 45:44 | 26 | |
| 7 | 18 | 7 | 4 | 7 | +2 | 29:27 | 25 | |
| 8 | 18 | 7 | 4 | 7 | -10 | 29:39 | 25 | |
| 9 | 18 | 5 | 8 | 5 | -3 | 26:29 | 23 | |
| 10 | 18 | 5 | 5 | 8 | -2 | 26:28 | 20 | |
| 11 | 18 | 6 | 2 | 10 | -17 | 30:47 | 20 | |
| 12 | 18 | 3 | 8 | 7 | -8 | 24:32 | 17 | |
| 13 | 18 | 4 | 4 | 10 | -8 | 25:33 | 16 | |
| 14 | 18 | 4 | 4 | 10 | -11 | 24:35 | 16 | |
| 15 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 12 | -14 | 19:33 | 12 |
| # | GP | W | D | L | DIFF | Goals | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 17 | 10 | 4 | 3 | +21 | 38:17 | 34 | |
| 2 | 19 | 10 | 4 | 5 | +16 | 35:19 | 34 | |
| 3 | 18 | 10 | 3 | 5 | +13 | 37:24 | 33 | |
| 4 | 17 | 9 | 2 | 6 | +1 | 25:24 | 29 | |
| 5 | 18 | 7 | 6 | 5 | +7 | 32:25 | 27 | |
| 6 | 17 | 8 | 3 | 6 | +4 | 29:25 | 27 | |
| 7 | 18 | 7 | 5 | 6 | +0 | 24:24 | 26 | |
| 8 | 17 | 7 | 4 | 6 | -1 | 20:21 | 25 | |
| 9 | 18 | 6 | 6 | 6 | -5 | 20:25 | 24 | |
| 10 | 18 | 7 | 1 | 10 | +2 | 27:25 | 22 | |
| 11 | 18 | 6 | 4 | 8 | -1 | 32:33 | 22 | |
| 12 | 19 | 5 | 7 | 7 | -5 | 24:29 | 22 | |
| 13 | 18 | 5 | 6 | 7 | +3 | 32:29 | 21 | |
| 14 | 18 | 4 | 5 | 9 | -14 | 22:36 | 17 | |
| 15 | 18 | 4 | 2 | 12 | -28 | 18:46 | 14 |
Minnesota United hosted San Diego FC in a competitive MLS clash on August 2nd, 2026. Both teams sought to assert dominance, with the Loons aiming to capitalize on home advantage against a determined San Diego outfit.
Minnesota United displayed attacking intent from the outset, registering 78 attacks and creating one big chance. Their build-up play saw them distribute passes effectively between their own half and the opposition's, with 204 passes in the attacking third. The Loons' ability to get the ball into dangerous areas was evident in their 75 passes into the final third, supported by 12 key passes aimed at unlocking the San Diego defense. Despite a possession share of 32%, they managed 8 shots on target, indicating a consistent threat.
San Diego FC, while perhaps seeing less of the ball, would have focused on defensive solidity and exploiting opportunities when they arose. The statistics suggest a closely contested affair, with both teams likely engaged in a tactical battle for control. Minnesota's offensive pressure, evidenced by their attacking statistics, would have been met with a resolute San Diego backline, making for an intriguing tactical dynamic as the game progressed through its initial stages.
The second half likely saw Minnesota United continue to push for a breakthrough, building on their 0.93 expected goals. Their attacking forays, including 8 corners and 20 crosses, aimed to stretch the San Diego defense. The Loons' 16 tackles and 10 successful tackles suggest they were actively engaged in winning back possession when the opportunity arose, attempting to regain momentum and create further scoring opportunities in the latter stages of the match.
San Diego FC, conversely, would have been looking to make the most of any chances that came their way, potentially absorbing pressure and looking for swift counter-attacks. The match statistics hint at a game where fine margins would have been crucial. With 8 shots on target for Minnesota and a competitive number of attacks from both sides, the game was likely a tense affair, with neither team able to definitively seize control and secure a decisive advantage.
