United States - MLS Next ProData current as of September 24, 2026

Minnesota United II vs San Jose Earthquakes II: match statistics

Minnesota United II vs San Jose Earthquakes II: form, goals and key statistics

Game details

Minnesota United II played against San Jose Earthquakes II in MLS Next Pro (United States). The game was played on August 9, 2026. Final score: 1:1.

Recent form

Minnesota United II has 1 win, 1 draw and 3 losses over its last five games, averaging 0.80 points per game. San Jose Earthquakes II has 1 win, 1 draw and 3 losses, with 0.80 points per game.

Scoring records

Minnesota United II scores 1.38 goals per game and allows 1.62. San Jose Earthquakes II scores 2.00 and allows 1.26. Games in this league average 3.25 goals.

BTTS and goal totals

Both teams score in 52% of Minnesota United II's games and 63% of San Jose Earthquakes II's. The Over 2.5 rates are 57% and 63%, compared with league averages of 61% for BTTS and 66% for Over 2.5.

xG and shots

San Jose Earthquakes II has the higher season xG average, 1.64 to 1.58 per game. Minnesota United II takes 13.5 shots per game, while San Jose Earthquakes II takes 13.8.

First-half and second-half trends

Minnesota United II leads at halftime in 29% of its games and scores 0.71 goals per game after halftime. San Jose Earthquakes II leads at halftime in 47% and scores 0.89 after halftime.

When the teams score

Minnesota United II's most productive scoring window is minutes 61-75 (7 goals). For San Jose Earthquakes II, it is minutes 31-45+ (10 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.

League scoring profile

MLS Next Pro games average 3.25 goals. Both teams score in 61% of games, and 66% finish with at least three goals.

Head-to-head record

Before this game, 3 previous meetings were available. The record was 1 home win, 0 draws and 2 away wins. Those games averaged 2.33 goals, with both teams scoring in 33% of them.

Archived pre-match analysis

This analysis was prepared before kick-off. The conclusions use only information available before the match and do not include the final result or post-match statistics.

General match analysis

Minnesota United II have the home advantage: they average 1.7 goals per match at home, while their chances created are valued at 1.83 xG, higher than San Jose Earthquakes II’s 1.64 xG away from home. The hosts also register more shots on target at home, averaging 5.8 compared with the visitors’ 4.6, with almost identical finishing efficiency (11% versus 12%). However, both teams are in poor recent form, having each recorded 1 win, 1 draw and 3 defeats in their last five matches. During that period, Minnesota conceded 11 goals, while San Jose conceded 7. The visitors’ away defense offers little stability, as they concede an average of 1.7 goals and have kept a clean sheet in only 10% of such matches. Given Minnesota’s greater attacking potential at home, the hosts’ advantage appears slight but sufficient to indicate result 1.

View the statistical overview
BTTS - will both teams score?

The BTTS - Yes tip is primarily supported by San Jose Earthquakes II’s defensive profile away from home: the team concedes an average of 1.70 goals, keeps a clean sheet in only 10% of matches, and their opponents create an average of 1.71 xG against them. At home, Minnesota United II scores an average of 2.33 goals with 5.78 shots on target per match, giving them a strong foundation to exploit this weakness. The visitors should, in turn, benefit from a clear decline in Minnesota’s defensive performance, with the hosts conceding 11 goals in their last 5 matches, or 2.2 per game, while opponents have recorded an average xG of 2.02. During this period, San Jose produced 1.88 xG per match and scored an average of 1.4 goals, which supports the expectation that they will find the net despite the hosts’ stronger season-long home defense, conceding 0.78 goals per game. The season-long BTTS rate stands at 80% for San Jose and 62% across the league, making a scenario in which both teams score more likely than BTTS - No, meaning that at least one team fails to score. This does not automatically imply a 0:0 draw or that neither team will score.

View BTTS statistics
Over/Under - goals analysis

San Jose Earthquakes II have had matches with at least 2 goals in 90% of their games, while Minnesota United II have conceded an average of 2.2 goals over their last five matches. The hosts score an average of 2.33 goals at home, whereas the visitors concede 1.70 goals away, clearly supporting the likelihood of them finding the net. The San Jose side have recently created chances worth 1.88 xG per match, while Minnesota have allowed opponents 2.02 xG, making a goal for the visitors a realistic scenario as well. The league-wide average is 3.28 goals, and 66% of its matches have gone Over 2.5 goals, although Minnesota’s more inconsistent form reduces confidence in a high over. The strongest signal therefore remains Over 1.5, as the projected total of 3.05 goals provides a substantial margin above this line.

View Over/Under statistics
HT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario

The most likely HT/FT outcome is a draw at half-time and a Minnesota win at full-time, as San Jose were level at the break in 50% of their matches, compared with 33% for Minnesota. However, the hosts have a clearly stronger potential to secure the final victory: they win 56% of their matches, compared with 30% for the visitors, score an average of 2.33 goals versus San Jose’s 1.70, and concede just 0.78 goals per game. Minnesota’s advantage is also evident after half-time, when they average 1.00 goal scored and 0.44 conceded, while their opponents concede as many as 1.30 goals after the interval. Recent form calls for caution, as the hosts have not led at the break in any of their last five matches, but San Jose’s poor defensive record and their 60% rate of second-half defeats favor a late turnaround in Minnesota’s direction.

View first-half and second-half statistics

Stats by half

0 : 0
First half
1 : 1
Second half

Game stats

53Possession (%)47
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
15Shots15
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
5Shots on target5
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
1.75xG1.75
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
3Corners10
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
63Dangerous attacks64
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
6Fouls14
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
0Cards0
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

Pre-game profilewhat do the season numbers say?

This team profile combines season stats and recent form. In-game statistics appear after the final whistle.

Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
1.38Goals scored / game2
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
1.62Goals allowed / game1.26
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
48%Average possession51%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
4.24Shots on target / game5.16
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

Team statswho is more efficient?

Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.

13.52Shots per game13.79
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
4.24Shots on target5.16
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
10.2%Shot conversion14.5%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
48%Possession51%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
1.58xG for1.64
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
1.54xG against1.5
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

Shooting quality

Minnesota United II: BalancedSan Jose Earthquakes II: Efficient finishing
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Accuracy (shots on target)31%37%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.120.12
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.330.39

xG per shot around 0.08 usually means long-range attempts; 0.15+ usually means box chances. The style label comes from possession, shot volume and conversion.

* xG (expected goals) says how many goals a team should score from its chances. If actual goals are above xG, finishing is above average; if below xG, chances are being missed.

Team formwho is in better shape?

Last five games and season record, overall, at home and away.

Minnesota United II
DLWLL
Season result split
38% W14% D48% L
Season (W-D-L)
8-3-10
1.29 pts / game · goal difference -5
Last 5 (W-D-L)
1-1-3
0.80 pts / game
Record at home (W-D-L)
4-3-3
Last 5 at home
2-1-2
WLWDL
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.2Goals conceded: 2.2xG: 1.27Opponent xG: 2.02BTTS: 60%Over 2.5: 80%
San Jose Earthquakes II
WLLLD
Season result split
42% W21% D37% L
Season (W-D-L)
8-4-7
1.47 pts / game · goal difference +14
Last 5 (W-D-L)
1-1-3
0.80 pts / game
Record away (W-D-L)
3-3-4
Last 5 away
1-2-2
DDLWL
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.4Goals conceded: 1.4xG: 1.90Opponent xG: 1.03BTTS: 40%Over 2.5: 40%

Goalshow do both teams score and concede?

How many goals both teams score and concede, plus how often they keep a clean sheet or fail to score.

San Jose Earthquakes II is 45% better for: goals scored per game.

1.38 goals / game - Minnesota United II · 2 goals / game - San Jose Earthquakes II

San Jose Earthquakes II is 29% better for: goals allowed per game.

1.62 goals / game - Minnesota United II · 1.26 goals / game - San Jose Earthquakes II

Minnesota United II scoring profile: very strong

Minnesota United II scores in 67% of games (14 of 21 games), while San Jose Earthquakes II keeps a clean sheet in 16% (3 of 19 games).

San Jose Earthquakes II scoring profile: very strong

San Jose Earthquakes II scores in 74% of games (14 of 19 games), while Minnesota United II keeps a clean sheet in 19% (4 of 21 games).

29Goals scored (season)38
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
34Goals conceded (season)24
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
3Average goals per game3.26
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
6Goals scored (last 5)7
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
11Goals conceded (last 5)7
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

How often they score at least...

67%1 goal74%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
33%2 goals47%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
19%3 goals37%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
14%4 goals21%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

How often they concede at least...

81%1 goal84%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
57%2 goals32%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
19%3 goals11%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
5%4 goals0%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

* Statistics include both teams' home and away games this season.

Both teams scored (BTTS)how often do both teams score?

How often games involving these teams produce goals at both ends, compared with the league average.

52%
Minnesota United II - BTTSBTTS - percentage of matches where both teams scored.11 of 21 games
63%
San Jose Earthquakes II - BTTSBTTS - percentage of matches where both teams scored.12 of 19 games
61%
League average

Goal patterns

29%BTTS at half-time26%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
14%BTTS in both halves11%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
29%Scored in both halves37%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

BTTS and goal count

48%Min. 3 goals and BTTS53%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
10%Min. 3 goals without BTTS11%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
60%BTTS - last 540%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

Goal count (Over/Under)how often do these games cross the goal lines?

See how often games involving these teams clear each goal line, for the full game and each half.

Full game - team comparison (Over)

Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

1st half

81%Min. 1 goal before half-time74%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
52%Min. 2 goals before half-time42%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
24%Min. 3 goals before half-time26%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

2nd half

71%Min. 1 goal after half-time84%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
38%Min. 2 goals after half-time53%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
19%Min. 3 goals after half-time37%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

Game halveswhen do the teams score more often?

How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.

San Jose Earthquakes II is 61% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

1.14 pts / game - Minnesota United II · 1.84 pts / game - San Jose Earthquakes II

Minnesota United II - half-time state
29% leading29% draw43% trailing
San Jose Earthquakes II - half-time state
47% leading42% draw11% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

1.14Points per game (1st half)1.84
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
0.67Goals scored (1st half)1.11
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
0.95Goals conceded (1st half)0.37
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
1.62Average goals (1st half)1.47
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
38%Clean sheet before half-time63%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
52%No goal before half-time37%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

After half-time (2nd half)

1.24Points per game (2nd half)1.26
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
0.71Goals scored (2nd half)0.89
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
0.67Goals conceded (2nd half)0.89
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
1.38Average goals (2nd half)1.79
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
52%Clean sheet after half-time42%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II
52%No goal after half-time53%
Minnesota United IISan Jose Earthquakes II

Minnesota United II - second-half results

29% W38% D33% L
24
Half-time points
14
Half-time goals
-6
Goal difference (1st half)
26
Second-half points
+1
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.14
PPG before half-time
Lead holding131%

Leads at halftime in 29% of games and wins 38%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime-0.3

Defense stays consistent across the full game.

San Jose Earthquakes II - second-half results

37% W16% D47% L
35
Half-time points
21
Half-time goals
+14
Goal difference (1st half)
24
Second-half points
0
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.84
PPG before half-time
Lead holding89%

Leads at halftime in 47% of games and wins 42%. Usually protects a halftime lead through the final whistle.

Defense after halftime+0.5

Allows 0.5 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.

Minnesota United II - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game0.401.00
Goals scored / game0.60.6
Goals allowed / game1.40.8
Average goals per game2.01.4
1 goal100%80%
2 goals80%60%
3 goals20%0%
Clean sheet0%40%
No goal40%60%
Goal difference-4-1
Half-time: 0% leading - 40% draw - 60% trailing
2nd half: 20% won - 40% draw - 40% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 60% - Half-time goals total: 3
San Jose Earthquakes II - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.201.20
Goals scored / game0.60.8
Goals allowed / game0.41.0
Average goals per game1.01.8
1 goal40%100%
2 goals20%40%
3 goals20%40%
Clean sheet60%40%
No goal80%60%
Goal difference+1-1
Half-time: 20% leading - 60% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 40% won - 0% draw - 60% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 20% - Half-time goals total: 3

* Table colors show frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate and red is rare. They are not team ratings.

Goals by minutewhen do goals arrive?

The parts of a game in which both teams score and allow the most goals.

Minnesota United II
ScoredConceded
3
3
0-15
6
4
16-30
5
13
31-45
3
4
46-60
7
6
61-75
5
4
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 61-75 (7 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (13). Late-goal balance (76-90): +1 - wins late phases.

San Jose Earthquakes II
ScoredConceded
7
2
0-15
4
2
16-30
10
3
31-45
8
4
46-60
6
5
61-75
3
8
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (10 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (8). Late-goal balance (76-90): -5 - late phases are a weakness.

* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.

Additional team indicatorswhat do xG, efficiency and form show?

A comparison of chance quality, results and trends from completed games this season.

Game profile

3.13
Estimated goals
attack vs. opponent defense
1.3 : 1.8
Estimated goal split
home : away
96%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
58%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
-26%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
50%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
9%
0:0 risk
about 1 in 11 matches
0-1
Most common goal range
attack vs. defense for both teams

Minnesota United II

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.04
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
-0.28
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
+0.5 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.20
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
-0.08
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
75%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
115%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
-0.49
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.0
Late goals
17% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 10% come in the first quarter-hour.
17%

San Jose Earthquakes II

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.14
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.60
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-12.7 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
+0.36
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.24
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
142%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
68%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
-0.67
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
-0.2
Late goals
8% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 18% come in the first quarter-hour.
8%

* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range use public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical game profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed games from the season.

League contextis this a high-scoring league?

How both teams compare with league-wide averages (MLS Next Pro).

Teams vs league

Minnesota United IILigaSan Jose Earthquakes II
Average goals per game 3.003.25 3.26
Both teams scored 52%61% 63%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) 57%66% 63%
Clean sheets 19%22% 16%
Goal before half-time 81%76% 74%
Goal after half-time 71%84% 84%

^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.

3.25
Average goals per game
61%
Both teams scored
66%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
22%
Clean sheets
1.84
Home goals / game
1.41
Away goals / game
+30%
Home attack advantage
+23%
Home defensive advantage
+20%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
76%
1 goal
43%
2 goals
18%
3 goals
5%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
84%
1 goal
57%
2 goals
27%
3 goals
8%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. San Jose Earthquakes IISubstitutionOn: Martin Kwende Jr.Off: Diogo Baptista
  2. Minnesota United IISubstitutionOn: Troy PuttOff: Jakob Friedman

Referee and managers

Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.

Head-to-head

Record from Minnesota United II's perspective: 1 win, 0 draws and 2 losses against San Jose Earthquakes II. Games average 2.33 goals, and both teams scored in 33% of them.

San Jose Earthquakes II
1 : 0
Minnesota United II
Minnesota United FC II
1 : 0
San Jose Earthquakes II
San Jose Earthquakes II
3 : 2
Minnesota United FC II

FAQ

What was the result of Minnesota United II vs San Jose Earthquakes II?

The MLS Next Pro match finished Minnesota United II 1:1 San Jose Earthquakes II. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What is the head-to-head record between Minnesota United II and San Jose Earthquakes II?

In the last 3 head-to-head matches Minnesota United II won 1, San Jose Earthquakes II won 2 and 0 ended level. These games averaged 2.33 goals, with both teams scoring in 33% of them.

What do the goal statistics show before Minnesota United II vs San Jose Earthquakes II?

Minnesota United II score 1.38 goals per game on average and San Jose Earthquakes II 2.00. The MLS Next Pro average is 3.25 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 66% of games. Both teams score in 52% of Minnesota United II's matches and 63% of San Jose Earthquakes II's.

What form are Minnesota United II and San Jose Earthquakes II in?

Over the last 5 games Minnesota United II have a 1-1-3 record (0.80 points per game) and San Jose Earthquakes II 1-1-3 (0.80 points per game).

Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Minnesota United II vs San Jose Earthquakes II?

The statistical background for Minnesota United II vs San Jose Earthquakes II — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under — is on this page. The tip with full reasoning and a value assessment is in the NoFluffPicks app.