Major League Soccer · 2026Sat, 14 Mar 2026, 17:00 UTCFull timeBMO FieldFull-time recap

Toronto FC

LLW

1–1Full-time recap

New York Red Bulls

WWL

This page describes the completed match context. The result is not presented as a prior forecast.

This match

Match statistics

Metric	Toronto FC	New York Red Bulls
Shots	12 shots/match	18 shots/match▲
Shots on target	7 shots/match	8 shots/match▲
Expected goals	0.96 xG/match	2.06 xG/match▲
Possession	32%	68%
Corners	5 corners/match	11 corners/match
Fouls	10 fouls/match	13 fouls/match
Yellow cards	1 cards/match▲	2 cards/match

30-second read

What the record shows

The clearest recorded pattern is: New York Red Bulls's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit above their competition baselines. A second useful context is: New York Red Bulls have recorded the higher season possession share. Limitation: At least one team has fewer than the configured season sample.

New York Red Bulls show a distinct attacking-volume record

weak

New York Red Bulls's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit above their competition baselines.

10 shots/match▲ShotsToronto FC · New York Red Bulls16 shots/match

Evidence and caveat

Comparison: Team shot volume is paired with the opponent's recorded shot allowance.

Window: season

Metric	Toronto FC	New York Red Bulls	Baseline
Shots	10 shots/match	16 shots/match	12 shots/match
Shots against	14.5 shots/match	11 shots/match	11.8 shots/match

Caveat: Shot volume describes activity; it does not establish finishing quality or a match outcome.

The teams have contrasting possession records

weak

New York Red Bulls have recorded the higher season possession share.

42.5%▲PossessionToronto FC · New York Red Bulls63%

Evidence and caveat

Comparison: The recorded possession gap is 20.5 percentage points.

Window: season

Metric	Toronto FC	New York Red Bulls	Baseline
Possession	42.5%	63%	49.8%

Caveat: Possession share does not show where possession occurred or how chances were created.

Metric comparison

Values, percentiles and samples

Where the edge is

Toronto FC favored in 0 of 14 directional metrics · New York Red Bulls in 0 · 14 too close

1 goals/matchGoals scoredseason · 4/41 goals/match

1.75 goals/matchGoals allowedseason · 4/41.25 goals/match

—Expected goalsseason · 2/1—

—Expected goals allowedseason · 2/1—

10 shots/matchShotsseason · 4/416 shots/match

14.5 shots/matchShots allowedseason · 4/411 shots/match

4.75 shots/matchShots on targetseason · 4/47.25 shots/match

4.25 shots/matchShots on target allowedseason · 4/45 shots/match

42.5%Possessionseason · 4/463%

5 corners/matchCornersseason · 4/49.25 corners/match

6.5 corners/matchCorners allowedseason · 4/45 corners/match

—Cardsseason · 2/31.67 cards/match

11.8 fouls/matchFoulsseason · 4/412.5 fouls/match

—Passesseason · 0/0—

—Pass accuracyseason · 0/0—

—Shots inside boxseason · 0/0—

—Blocked shotsseason · 0/0—

—Goalkeeper savesseason · 0/0—

—Offsidesseason · 0/0—

25%Clean-sheet frequencyseason · 4/425%

75%Scoring frequencyseason · 4/475%

Style profile

How the teams compare

Competition percentiles describe recorded style; they do not rank likely outcomes.

Possession control

Relative share of recorded possession within the competition.

Toronto FC12.5

New York Red Bulls91.1

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Attacking volume

Recorded shot and scoring volume, expressed as competition percentiles.

Toronto FC29.8

New York Red Bulls73.2

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Defensive resistance

Lower recorded scoring and shot allowance produces a higher descriptive percentile.

Toronto FC31.5

New York Red Bulls50

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Directness proxy

Shots per possession point; a descriptive transition/directness proxy, not an outcome score.

Toronto FC48.2

New York Red Bulls69.6

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Physicality

Recorded fouls and cards relative to competition peers.

Toronto FC48.2

New York Red Bulls43.9

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 75%

Set-piece relevance

Corner volume relative to competition peers.

Toronto FC44.6

New York Red Bulls98.2

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Tempo and pressure proxy

Combined event-volume percentiles for shots, corners and fouls.

Toronto FC38.8

New York Red Bulls87.5

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Recent form

Season, last 10 and last 5

Window

Last 5

4 / 4 matches

1 goals/matchGoals scored4/41 goals/match

1.75 goals/matchGoals allowed4/4▲1.25 goals/match

—Expected goals2/1—

10 shots/matchShots4/4▲16 shots/match

4.75 shots/matchShots on target4/4▲7.25 shots/match

42.5%Possession4/463%

5 corners/matchCorners4/49.25 corners/match

—Cards2/31.67 cards/match

11.8 fouls/matchFouls4/412.5 fouls/match

Window

Last 10

4 / 4 matches

1 goals/matchGoals scored4/41 goals/match

1.75 goals/matchGoals allowed4/4▲1.25 goals/match

—Expected goals2/1—

10 shots/matchShots4/4▲16 shots/match

4.75 shots/matchShots on target4/4▲7.25 shots/match

42.5%Possession4/463%

5 corners/matchCorners4/49.25 corners/match

—Cards2/31.67 cards/match

11.8 fouls/matchFouls4/412.5 fouls/match

Window

Season

4 / 4 matches

1 goals/matchGoals scored4/41 goals/match

1.75 goals/matchGoals allowed4/4▲1.25 goals/match

—Expected goals2/1—

10 shots/matchShots4/4▲16 shots/match

4.75 shots/matchShots on target4/4▲7.25 shots/match

42.5%Possession4/463%

5 corners/matchCorners4/49.25 corners/match

—Cards2/31.67 cards/match

11.8 fouls/matchFouls4/412.5 fouls/match

Venue split

Home and away samples

Window

Home team at home / away team away

1 / 2 matches

—Goals scored1/2—

—Goals allowed1/2—

—Expected goals1/1—

—Shots1/2—

—Shots on target1/2—

—Possession1/2—

—Corners1/2—

—Cards0/1—

—Fouls1/2—

Schedule context

Rest and recent workload

5.75 daysRest before fixtureprevious completed fixtures · 1/15.85 days

2 matchesMatches in previous 14 daysprevious completed fixtures · 1/12 matches

Evidence quality

How much supports this analysis

Grade C · Limited evidencelimited

Season samples4 / 4home / away teams

Recent samples4 / 4last-five windows

FreshnessLess than one dayfrom nearest prior match

At least one team has fewer than the configured season sample.
At least one team has an incomplete last-five window.
Recorded xG is incomplete, so xG context is omitted where unavailable.

Known unknowns

Lineups, injuries, suspensions and tactical changes are not available in the retained dataset.
Some metrics are unavailable or below their observation minimum: xg_for, xg_against, cards.
The completed-match sample is too small for broad style conclusions.

Analysis cutoff: Sat, 14 Mar 2026, 21:00 UTC · analysis-v4