Statistically obviously nothing, but given Houston's track record of performance (5 conference final games in their 7 seasons of existence), a whole lot. I'd say on paper LA is probably more of the team getting hot, but given their performances over the past 4 seasons, and their obviously talent, i'd probably remove the "decent-team" qualifier from them.
First-to-five always makes me think fondly of watching Mauricio Cienfuegos play. Always a joy, but him taking over at the tail end of one of those final games plus AET is worth remembering. 2001 on the way to MLS Cup, against Chicago in the semis: (Unless you are a Chicago fan, then it probably isn't worth remembering any more than Martinez's goal from last night is for me. Damn! Thought of it again.)
Because they are Houston with all those previous shiny stars, and you were Colorado with a, with a, with a ..... You were the Rapids . Sorry best I could do.
We just had 3 out of 4 series decided by the away team getting the big win in the 2nd leg, and now the problem is that away teams are supposedly not motivated to attack?
That's what I thought. BTW, in 2009 Salt Lake was 9 points behind the SS. Houston was 3 in 2007 and 9 in 2006 LA was 19 in 2005 DC was 7 in 2004 SJ was 2 in 2003 and 8 in 2001 Chicago was 12 in 1998 DC was 12 in 1996 So you can certainly claim that Colorado was a half-decent team getting hot at the right time, considering they had the second highest gap between themselves and the Shield winners, but I don't see how you can rule Houston out of that same category this year. Heck LA's 12 would tie for 3rd biggest gap.
So I will let you go back over previous years and determine the final week situation . . . but it was interesting this year. Going into the final weekend . . Houston could have finished as high as third in the East - tied for third in the West. Depending on Goals could have been fifth out of ten as opposed to ninth out of ten. Obviously, two teams just ahead of them won and they played their reserves in CO but I wouldn't say it is "only" getting hot in the playoffs.
That's a good point if it happens. One difference is that 2012 Houston finished with seven more points than 2010 Colorado did, and they probably would have finished better if the didn't have one of those weird road show starts because of a late stadium opening.
2012 Houston Dynamo: 53 pts / 34 games = 1.56 PPG 2010 Colorado Rapids: 46 pts / 30 games = 1.53 PPG Not a huge difference there.
Yes, everything about this post yes. First to 5 was pretty awful, but First to 4 combines the best thing from that format and the best from the current format.
One of my responsibilities as a father is to teach Golazocito (u-8... left-footed defender... I'm just sayin') that goalies are freaks and weirdos. To wit:
I'm not going to do every year but I know the Rapids would have moved from the 7th seed and the Eastern bracket to the 6th seed and the Western bracket in 2010 if they hadn't fumbled away a 2-0 lead in the final minutes of their final game. They had only 2 losses in their last 10 games (and 3 draws) including beating SS winner LA in LA 3-1 on the next to last week of the season.
yeah my point was doing point spread between SS and a particular team does not tell the story of "good." Rather, the grouping of all the playoff teams will tell that story. KC and SJ certainly pulled away from the middle of the pack and Vancouver was trailing. The other 7 teams were separated by 5 points over 34 games.
My thoughts as well although I also know nothing of Roy Miller's ability to hit a FK. The situation set up well for a left footed kick and you have to figure the keeper was focussing 100% on Henry. In the end, looked dumb.
Well looking at 2010 that way, LA had 59, Salt Lake had 56, the other 8 playoff teams were between 46 and 51. So 8 teams separated by 5 points over 30 games.
This is not completely uncharted territory for the Curse - after all, it took RSL 2 years to win the Cup after trading Ballouchy. So maybe next year NY wins the Cup. The Curse moves in mysterious ways.
Not really. This league is built on parity. All you need to do is get into the playoffs, and then anything can happen. RSL and Seattle were separated by one point. NYRB and DCU were separated by one point. So those weren't upsets at all really. Houston and LA both started slow, but have played really well down the stretch. As we all know, the playoffs (regardless of sport) always reward the team that's playing the best at that particular time..................not the best team over the course of the season.
My 2001 Mariners are everlasting proof of that. If the WS had been played in April - August I am pretty sure they could have won any seven games series in 3 games, they were that flippin fantastic.
And not only that, it's not even a statistically valid measure of "best team at a particular time". But there is no way to get a reasonably statistically valid sample size in a reasonably short period of time, especially in a real sport like soccer, that you can't play every day. So it is what it is. For now, as a fan of a fallen top seed, I'm left with taking some consolation in Bruce Arena's own admission that the Quakes are "really the champions in the league". I think it wouldn’t be right if I didn’t just take a minute to just congratulate San Jose on their year. They’re really the champions in the league. http://www.lagalaxy.com/blog/beat/2...-jose-arena-affirms-galaxy-best-team-mls-july
The 2001 Mariners were 20-7 in regular season games in Sept and Oct. I think sometimes in the playoffs crazy stuff just happens, even to teams that were playing well immediately before the playoffs.
Not that the whole world was not but the team was noticibly different following 9/11 (8-1 before, 12-6 thereafter). The joy that they played with was just gone. Not really making excuses just saying that despite the good September/October record there was a difference in the team, that is why I chose August. But enough of that back to MLS.
RSL traded him in 07 and then won in 09. So there is still hope. At least that's what I want to believe.
Highest seed should get to decide who hosts first. They gotta ask the question "Would we rather make them travel here and then travel again on short notice, or do we want home field for the 2nd leg?" I think one of the reasons the 2nd leg doesn't work out for the higher seeds is that they end up having more travel time than the lower seed.