Naples vs Chattanooga Red Wolves: match statistics
Naples vs Chattanooga Red Wolves: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Naples played Chattanooga Red Wolves in USL League One (United States). The match was played on 26 September 2026. Final score: 1:0.
Current form
Naples: 1-2-2, 1.00 points/match. Chattanooga Red Wolves: 3-2-0, 2.20 points/match.
Goal statistics
Naples scores 1.12 and concedes 1.65 goals per match. Chattanooga Red Wolves scores 1.81 and concedes 1.46. League average: 2.98 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Naples 46%, Chattanooga Red Wolves 65%. Over 2.5: Naples 50%, Chattanooga Red Wolves 62%. League level: BTTS 61%, Over 2.5 60%.
xG, shots and style
Naples has higher xG: 1.53 vs 1.39. Naples: 12.8 shots per match, Chattanooga Red Wolves: 11.4.
Match halves
Naples: half-time lead 35%, second-half goals 0.65. Chattanooga Red Wolves: half-time lead 38%, second-half goals 0.96.
Goals by minute
Naples: 76-90+ (11 goals). Chattanooga Red Wolves: 46-60 (12 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
USL League One: 2.98 goals per match, BTTS 61%, Over 2.5 60%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 4 previous H2H matches were available: 0-2-2. Average goals 2.75, BTTS 75%.
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
Chattanooga Red Wolves sit 6th, while Naples are only 14th, with the gap also reflected in their season records: 13 wins for the visitors compared with 8 victories for the hosts. The away side are unbeaten in their last five matches, collecting 11 points and conceding just 3 goals during that period, whereas Naples have managed only 5 points with a 4:8 goal difference. The visitors are also more effective away from home, averaging 1.67 goals per match compared with Naples’ 1.25 at home, while their shot conversion rate stands at 13% versus 10%. The hosts hold a slight edge in the quality of chances created on home soil, with an average xG of 1.49 compared with 1.46 for their opponents, but their recent form significantly undermines the credibility of their attacking output. Red Wolves’ away defensive performances can be error-prone, making a draw a realistic outcome, but the current trend points to a narrow victory for the visitors.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
The signal for both teams to score is strengthened by Chattanooga Red Wolves’ seasonal profile, with their matches ending in BTTS in 83% of cases, compared with 50% for Naples. Both teams very rarely fail to score across the competition: Naples in 7% and Chattanooga in 8% of matches. Chattanooga also creates more chances, averaging 12.58 shots and 4.42 shots on target per match, while Naples has conceded an average of 1.6 goals in its last five appearances, with xG against at 1.96. The hosts have been less productive in terms of results over their last five matches, averaging 0.8 goals with BTTS landing only 20% of the time, but their xG remains at 1.46—practically the same as the 1.50 xG recently allowed by their opponents. Chattanooga’s defensive form, having conceded only 3 goals in five matches, reduces confidence in the pick, but the teams’ long-term consistency in scoring gives a slight edge to the BTTS scenario.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
The season profile clearly favors at least two goals: Chattanooga Red Wolves matches went over 1.5 goals in 92% of cases, compared with 64% for Naples. The visitors score an average of 1.67 goals per match, while Naples concede 1.14, and the two teams record 4.42 and 3.93 shots on target per game, respectively. The xG model also points to an open game, with the visitors averaging 1.46 xG against 1.65 xG conceded by the hosts, producing a total projection of 2.60 goals. Naples’ recent form has been weaker offensively, with 0.8 goals scored per match across their last five appearances, but the team has also conceded 1.6 goals per game. Therefore, Over 1.5 remains the safest option, given the significantly less stable Over 2.5 line.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
The strongest signal comes from Chattanooga Red Wolves’ current form: the team has lost none of its last five matches, winning three of them, and has averaged 1.4 goals scored against just 0.6 conceded. The visitors were leading at the break in four of their last five matches, while Naples had a Half-Time lead only twice and averaged just 0.6 goals scored before the interval during this period. The away side’s advantage is also evident in the quality of its attacking play, with an xG of 1.46 compared with 1.32 for the hosts, while Naples allows opponents an xG of 1.65. Although the hosts have won more often over the course of the season—57% compared with 42%—their recent run consists of just one victory and an average of 1.6 goals conceded per match, further supporting the HT/FT scenario of the visitors leading at the break and securing the win.
View first-half and second-half statisticsHalf-by-half
Match statistics
Pre-match profile— what do the season numbers say?
This is a team profile based on season data and form. Match-flow statistics are shown only after the fixture is played.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Attack and defence comparison for both teams in the current season.
Shooting quality
| Naples | Chattanooga Red Wolves | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 32% | 36% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.28 | 0.44 |
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 form— who is in better shape?
Last five matches and season record, overall and split by home and away matches.
Chattanooga Red Wolves is 120% better for: last-5 form.
1 pts / match - Naples · 2.2 pts / match - Chattanooga Red Wolves
Goals— how 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.
Chattanooga Red Wolves is 62% better for: goals scored per match.
1.12 goals / match - Naples · 1.81 goals / match - Chattanooga Red Wolves
Chattanooga Red Wolves is 13% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.65 goals / match - Naples · 1.46 goals / match - Chattanooga Red Wolves
Naples scores in 69% of matches (18 of 26 matches), while Chattanooga Red Wolves keeps a clean sheet in 27% (7 of 26 matches).
Chattanooga Red Wolves scores in 92% of matches (24 of 26 matches), while Naples keeps a clean sheet in 27% (7 of 26 matches).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* Statistics include both teams' home and away matches in the current season.
Both teams scored (BTTS)— how often do both teams score?
How often both teams' matches have goals on both sides, compared with the league average.
Goal patterns
BTTS and goal count
Goal count (Over/Under)— how often do these matches cross the goal lines?
How often matches involving these teams clear goal thresholds, in the full match and in each half.
Full match - team comparison (Over)
Over / Under - Naples
Over / Under - Chattanooga Red Wolves
1st half
2nd half
Match halves— when do the teams score more often?
How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.
Chattanooga Red Wolves is 12% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.27 pts / match - Naples · 1.42 pts / match - Chattanooga Red Wolves
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Naples - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 35% of matches and wins 31%. Usually protects the lead until full-time.
Concedes 0.3 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
Chattanooga Red Wolves - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 38% of matches and wins 50%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.40 | 0.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.6 | 0.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.4 | 1.2 |
| Average goals in match | 1.0 | 1.4 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 40% |
| No goal | 60% | 80% |
| Goal difference | +1 | -5 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.40 | 1.20 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.2 | 0.8 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 20% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 60% |
| No goal | 20% | 60% |
| Goal difference | +4 | 0 |
* Colours in tables show event frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate, red is rare. It is frequency, not a team rating.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
Match phases in which both teams most often score and concede.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (11 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (13). Late-goal balance (76-90): -2 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (12 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (10). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - wins late phases.
* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.
Additional team indicators— what do xG, efficiency and form show?
A comparison of chance quality, results and trends based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
Naples
Chattanooga Red Wolves
* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range are calculated from public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical match profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed matches from the season.
League context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (USL League One).
Teams vs league
| Naples | Liga | Chattanooga Red Wolves | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▼ 2.77 | 2.98 | ▲ 3.27 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 46% | 61% | ▲ 65% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 50% | 60% | ▲ 62% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 27% | 22% | ▲ 27% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 85% | 74% | ▲ 85% |
| Goal after half-time | • 81% | 82% | ▲ 85% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Lineups and player events
Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.
Home team
Starting lineup
Away team
Starting lineup
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
Head-to-head
Recent meetings (4): Naples 0 - 2 - 2 Chattanooga Red Wolves. Average goals 2.75, both teams scored in 75% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Naples vs Chattanooga Red Wolves?
The USL League One match finished Naples 1:0 Chattanooga Red Wolves. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between Naples and Chattanooga Red Wolves?
In the last 4 head-to-head matches Naples won 0, Chattanooga Red Wolves won 2 and 2 ended level. These games averaged 2.75 goals, with both teams scoring in 75% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Naples vs Chattanooga Red Wolves?
Naples score 1.12 goals per game on average and Chattanooga Red Wolves 1.81. The USL League One average is 2.98 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 60% of games. Both teams score in 46% of Naples's matches and 65% of Chattanooga Red Wolves's.
What form are Naples and Chattanooga Red Wolves in?
Over the last 5 games Naples have a 1-2-2 record (1.00 points per game) and Chattanooga Red Wolves 3-2-0 (2.20 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Naples vs Chattanooga Red Wolves?
The statistical background for Naples vs Chattanooga Red Wolves — 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.


