I hate to devote space to an Internet meme, but I’ve now read enough observations from people I feel like should know better that I feel the need to comment on this notion that somehow the first-round results “proved” this is a parity league.
MLS Playoff Upsets Prove Parity? I Beg To Differ
Sure, if you go by the seeding numbers, three of the four lower seeds won and I suppose on some level that means there were upsets.
But how big were those upsets, really? The most points that separated any of the two teams that played each other was the 11-point advantage the Los Angeles Galaxy had on the Seattle Sounders. And we know who won that one.
The other three matchups featured teams separated by as few as four points (Colorado Rapids and Columbus Crew) and no more than six (FC Dallas and Real Salt Lake). None of the teams that advanced won both legs and none of the playoffs were separated by more than one goal.
Were these upsets? Sure, but let’s keep that in perspective. The Rapids won at home and lost on the road, but advanced in a penalty shootout. FC Dallas won at home and tied at Rio Tinto.
Sure, the Quakes won at Red Bull Arena, but if they had done that in in the regular season, would it have made much of an impact? I doubt it.
As for this notion of the results proving parity, let’s keep in mind that we are looking at a sample size of two games. It shows that over the course of 180 minutes, one playoff-caliber MLS team is capable of beating another playoff-caliber team by one goal, give or take. I don’t have the numbers in front of me, but I’m guessing if you pit the No. 3 team in any league around the world against the No. 7 team in a two-legged playoff, there’s a decent chance the No. 7 team is going to win a fair amount of the time.
In other words, the first round of the playoffs doesn’t prove parity as much as it is just another example of how playoffs yield hard-to-predict results.
See More:
