Last year it was Houston falling at home to New York. This year it is Columbus having their season ended by Real Salt Lake. Schelotto did what he could, but it wasn't enough.
This result continues to demonstrate that the order of matches in the two-leg format does not help the higher seeded side in MLS as it does elsewhere. At the very least, that appears to be the case; I need to look inside the numbers. Will there be a push by the clubs to allow the top two seeds the option of hosting the first or second game? It would be a worthy topic of discussion during the winter meetings.
Woo, Utah!! :P
P.S. It's criminal that this blog doesn't get more comments. Solid, solid work.
Posted by: Jose | November 06, 2009 at 07:30 AM
In this case, would it have mattered? Columbus lost both games!
Posted by: Eric | November 06, 2009 at 10:48 AM
Yes, that is a good point. If you don't take care of home advantage, you put yourself at a big disadvantage no matter what order you play in.
I just completed a look at the two-leg statistics in the MLS playoffs, and the trends are the same as in Europe. More on that later.
Posted by: Howard Hamilton | December 20, 2009 at 02:05 PM