Major League Soccer · 2026Sun, 5 Apr 2026, 00:30 UTCFull timeSoldier FieldFull-time recap

Chicago Fire

LWDLW

1–0Full-time recap

Nashville SC

WDWWW

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

This match

Match statistics

Metric	Chicago Fire	Nashville SC
Shots	10 shots/match▲	9 shots/match
Shots on target	3 shots/match	4 shots/match▲
Expected goals	1.13 xG/match▲	0.7 xG/match
Possession	39%	61%
Corners	1 corners/match	3 corners/match
Fouls	19 fouls/match	13 fouls/match
Yellow cards	2 cards/match	1 cards/match▲

30-second read

What the record shows

The clearest recorded pattern is: Nashville SC's away-only shot average is below their full-season average. A second useful context is: Chicago Fire's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit below their competition baselines. Limitation: Evidence is usable but does not meet the strongest completeness threshold.

Nashville SC have a visible away split

weak

Nashville SC's away-only shot average is below their full-season average.

8 shots/match▲ShotsAway only · Season12.2 shots/match

Evidence and caveat

Comparison: Venue-only shot volume is compared with the same team's season record.

Window: away

Metric	Away only	Season	Baseline
Shots	8 shots/match	12.2 shots/match	12 shots/match

Caveat: Venue splits can reflect opponent mix and should be read with the listed sample.

Chicago Fire show a distinct attacking-volume record

moderate

Chicago Fire's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit below their competition baselines.

11 shots/match▲ShotsChicago Fire · Nashville SC12.2 shots/match

Evidence and caveat

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

Window: season

Metric	Chicago Fire	Nashville SC	Baseline
Shots	11 shots/match	12.2 shots/match	12 shots/match
Shots against	10.2 shots/match	9 shots/match	12.4 shots/match

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

Nashville SC's recent record differs from the season

weak

Nashville SC's last-five goals scored average is below their season average.

1.8 goals/match▲Goals forLast 5 · Season2.17 goals/match

Evidence and caveat

Comparison: An unweighted last-five average is compared with the unweighted season average.

Window: last_5 versus season

Metric	Last 5	Season	Baseline
Goals for	1.8 goals/match	2.17 goals/match	1.5 goals/match

Caveat: Five matches are sensitive to opponent mix and isolated match states.

Metric comparison

Values, percentiles and samples

Where the edge is

Chicago Fire favored in 1 of 14 directional metrics · Nashville SC in 7 · 6 too close

1.33 goals/matchGoals scoredseason · 6/6▲2.17 goals/match

0.83 goals/matchGoals allowedseason · 6/6▲0.5 goals/match

1.85 xG/matchExpected goalsseason · 3/31.68 xG/match

1.05 xG/matchExpected goals allowedseason · 3/30.64 xG/match

11 shots/matchShotsseason · 6/6▲12.2 shots/match

10.2 shots/matchShots allowedseason · 6/6▲9 shots/match

4.33 shots/matchShots on targetseason · 6/6▲5.17 shots/match

3.67 shots/matchShots on target allowedseason · 6/6▲2 shots/match

51.5%Possessionseason · 6/654.5%

4 corners/matchCornersseason · 6/63.67 corners/match

4.5 corners/matchCorners allowedseason · 6/6▲3.33 corners/match

2.67 cards/matchCardsseason · 3/31.67 cards/match

14.7 fouls/matchFoulsseason · 6/613.7 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—

50%Clean-sheet frequencyseason · 6/650%

83%▲Scoring frequencyseason · 6/667%

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.

Chicago Fire65

Nashville SC75

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Attacking volume

Recorded shot and scoring volume, expressed as competition percentiles.

Chicago Fire36.1

Nashville SC63.3

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Defensive resistance

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

Chicago Fire80

Nashville SC90.5

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Directness proxy

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

Chicago Fire18.3

Nashville SC25

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Physicality

Recorded fouls and cards relative to competition peers.

Chicago Fire80

Nashville SC45.9

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 75%

Set-piece relevance

Corner volume relative to competition peers.

Chicago Fire18.3

Nashville SC11.7

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Tempo and pressure proxy

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

Chicago Fire43.8

Nashville SC48.8

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Recent form

Season, last 10 and last 5

Window

Last 5

5 / 5 matches

1.4 goals/matchGoals scored5/5▲1.8 goals/match

0.6 goals/matchGoals allowed5/5▲0.4 goals/match

1.85 xG/match▲Expected goals3/31.68 xG/match

12 shots/matchShots5/511.8 shots/match

4.6 shots/matchShots on target5/54.6 shots/match

50.4%Possession5/554.4%

3.8 corners/matchCorners5/53.8 corners/match

—Cards2/2—

13.6 fouls/matchFouls5/513.2 fouls/match

Window

Last 10

6 / 6 matches

1.33 goals/matchGoals scored6/6▲2.17 goals/match

0.83 goals/matchGoals allowed6/6▲0.5 goals/match

1.85 xG/match▲Expected goals3/31.68 xG/match

11 shots/matchShots6/6▲12.2 shots/match

4.33 shots/matchShots on target6/6▲5.17 shots/match

51.5%Possession6/654.5%

4 corners/matchCorners6/63.67 corners/match

2.67 cards/matchCards3/31.67 cards/match

14.7 fouls/matchFouls6/613.7 fouls/match

Window

Season

6 / 6 matches

1.33 goals/matchGoals scored6/6▲2.17 goals/match

0.83 goals/matchGoals allowed6/6▲0.5 goals/match

1.85 xG/match▲Expected goals3/31.68 xG/match

11 shots/matchShots6/6▲12.2 shots/match

4.33 shots/matchShots on target6/6▲5.17 shots/match

51.5%Possession6/654.5%

4 corners/matchCorners6/63.67 corners/match

2.67 cards/matchCards3/31.67 cards/match

14.7 fouls/matchFouls6/613.7 fouls/match

Venue split

Home and away samples

Window

Home team at home / away team away

3 / 3 matches

1.67 goals/match▲Goals scored3/30.33 goals/match

0.67 goals/matchGoals allowed3/3▲0.33 goals/match

—Expected goals2/2—

14 shots/match▲Shots3/38 shots/match

5.33 shots/match▲Shots on target3/33 shots/match

49.7%Possession3/352.3%

4.67 corners/matchCorners3/33 corners/match

—Cards1/1—

14.3 fouls/matchFouls3/313.3 fouls/match

Schedule context

Rest and recent workload

14.2 daysRest before fixtureprevious completed fixtures · 1/114.1 days

0 matchesMatches in previous 14 daysprevious completed fixtures · 1/10 matches

Evidence quality

How much supports this analysis

Grade B · Useful evidencelimited

Season samples6 / 6home / away teams

Recent samples5 / 5last-five windows

FreshnessLess than one dayfrom nearest prior match

Evidence is usable but does not meet the strongest completeness threshold.

Known unknowns

Lineups, injuries, suspensions and tactical changes are not available in the retained dataset.

Analysis cutoff: Sun, 5 Apr 2026, 04:30 UTC · analysis-v4

Make a graphic from this match

Creator Studio builds a branded post from this match's recorded data, with its evidence grade and source cutoff carried into the export.

Create a graphic from this match

Match statistics

What the record shows

Nashville SC have a visible away split

Chicago Fire show a distinct attacking-volume record

Nashville SC's recent record differs from the season

Values, percentiles and samples

How the teams compare

Possession control

Attacking volume

Defensive resistance

Directness proxy

Physicality

Set-piece relevance

Tempo and pressure proxy

Season, last 10 and last 5

Last 5

Last 10

Season

Home and away samples

Home team at home / away team away

Rest and recent workload

How much supports this analysis

Known unknowns

Related matches

Make a graphic from this match