Toronto II vs FC Cincinnati II: match statistics
Toronto II vs FC Cincinnati II: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Toronto II played FC Cincinnati II in MLS Next Pro (United States). The match was played on 17 July 2026. Final score: 3:1.
Current form
Toronto II: 0-0-5, 0.00 points/match. FC Cincinnati II: 1-1-3, 0.80 points/match.
Goal statistics
Toronto II scores 1.50 and concedes 1.94 goals per match. FC Cincinnati II scores 0.94 and concedes 1.82. League average: 3.24 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Toronto II 56%, FC Cincinnati II 41%. Over 2.5: Toronto II 72%, FC Cincinnati II 59%. League level: BTTS 61%, Over 2.5 66%.
xG, shots and style
FC Cincinnati II has higher xG: 1.28 vs 1.26. Toronto II: 10.1 shots per match, FC Cincinnati II: 9.9.
Match halves
Toronto II: half-time lead 33%, second-half goals 0.89. FC Cincinnati II: half-time lead 12%, second-half goals 0.71.
Goals by minute
Toronto II: 61-75 (6 goals). FC Cincinnati II: 46-60 (4 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
MLS Next Pro: 3.24 goals per match, BTTS 61%, Over 2.5 66%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 4 previous H2H matches were available: 2-1-1. Average goals 2.25, BTTS 25%.
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
I back the home win. Toronto II have scored 27 goals this season versus 16 by FC Cincinnati II, and at home they average 1.75 goals with 4.5 shots on target, while the visitors average only 0.29 goals away and fail to score in 71% of their away matches. The hosts are also significantly more efficient in finishing chances (conversion rate 17% vs 3%) and record higher average xG (1.31 vs 1.22), indicating better quality of created opportunities. The risk for Toronto is a poor run in their last five games—they have scored 5 and conceded 16 (3.2 conceded per game on average); FC Cincinnati II in their last 5 matches have 1 win and 1 draw with 4 goals scored. Considering the seasonal attacking edge and the repeatedly documented away inefficiency of the visitors, I assign 60% probability to a home win, 20% to a draw and 20% to an away win.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Toronto II scores an average of 1.4 goals per match and has a 50% BTTS rate this season, whereas FC Cincinnati II averages only 0.29 goals per match with a 29% BTTS rate; the away side have failed to score in 71% of their matches. The difference in finishing efficiency is significant: Toronto converts 14% of shots versus Cincinnati's 3%, despite similar xG (1.32 vs 1.22), indicating the visitors create chances but rarely finish them. In the last 5 matches Toronto conceded an average of 3.2 goals (16 conceded), while Cincinnati scored 4 goals in 5 matches (0.8 avg.), so although the home side are defensively vulnerable, the visitors’ realistic goal-scoring ability is limited. Considering seasonal indicators (home BTTS 50% vs away 29%), 0% clean sheets for the visitors and 71% FTS for the away team, the signal for BTTS - No is stronger than signals for BTTS - Yes despite the league-wide BTTS level of 61%.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
I expect 1.64 goals for Toronto II and 1.43 for FC Cincinnati II, totaling 3.07 goals. The forecast is based on xG: the home side has xG_for 1.32 and concede an average xG_against 1.95 (home average after smoothing 1.64), while the visitors have xG_for 1.22 and the hosts xG_against 1.63 (visitor average 1.43). Seasonally Over 2.5 occurred in 60% of Toronto’s matches and 57% of Cincinnati’s, and in the last 5 matches Toronto produced Over 2.5 in 80% of cases and Cincinnati in 60%; the league average for Over 2.5 is 66%, which reinforces the signal for Over 2.5. Toronto averages 10.3 shots with 4.1 on target and a 14% conversion, while Cincinnati averages 9.43 shots with 3.43 on target and a 3% conversion; additionally Toronto conceded 16 goals in the last 5 matches (3.2 per game), and Cincinnati concedes 2.57 goals per game on the season, increasing goal likelihood. Given the expected 3.07 goals and strong seasonal and form-based Over indicators, I back the Over line at 1.5 as the strongest and most probable signal from the data.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
The most likely scenario is 1/1 (home team leads at half-time and wins at full-time), which I assign a 37% probability. The home side scores an average of 1.4 goals per match versus 0.29 for the visitors and posts an xG of 1.32 versus 1.22, indicating an offensive edge for Toronto II. Away teams have been trailing at the break in 86% of their away matches and concede an average of 1.29 goals by half-time, while the hosts score an average of 0.3 goals before the break; this increases the likelihood of the home team holding a lead after 45 minutes. Second halves are key — the hosts have scored 4 goals in the 46–60 minute window and 4 in 61–75, while visitors have conceded 4 and 3 goals in those periods; additionally, 80% of the hosts’ matches featured more than 0.5 goals after the break and shot conversion is 14% versus 3% for the visitors, reinforcing the signal that Toronto II will maintain their lead.
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
| Toronto II | FC Cincinnati II | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 44% | 38% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.13 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.34 | 0.25 |
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.
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.
Toronto II is 60% better for: goals scored per match.
1.5 goals / match - Toronto II · 0.94 goals / match - FC Cincinnati II
FC Cincinnati II is 7% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.94 goals / match - Toronto II · 1.82 goals / match - FC Cincinnati II
Toronto II scores in 72% of matches (13 of 18 matches), while FC Cincinnati II keeps a clean sheet in 18% (3 of 17 matches).
FC Cincinnati II scores in 59% of matches (10 of 17 matches), while Toronto II keeps a clean sheet in 22% (4 of 18 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 - Toronto II
Over / Under - FC Cincinnati II
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.
Toronto II is 114% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.39 pts / match - Toronto II · 0.65 pts / match - FC Cincinnati II
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Toronto II - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 33% of matches and wins 33%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 1.1 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
FC Cincinnati II - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 12% of matches and wins 24%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.60 | 0.40 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.0 | 2.2 |
| Average goals in match | 1.4 | 2.8 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 80% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 80% |
| Clean sheet | 20% | 20% |
| No goal | 60% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -3 | -8 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.80 | 1.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.2 | 0.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.2 | 0.6 |
| Average goals in match | 1.4 | 1.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 40% |
| No goal | 80% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -5 | 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 61-75 (6 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (14). Late-goal balance (76-90): -8 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (4 goals). Concedes most in 16-30 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - late phases are a weakness.
* 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
Toronto II
FC Cincinnati II
* 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 (MLS Next Pro).
Teams vs league
| Toronto II | Liga | FC Cincinnati II | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 3.44 | 3.24 | ▼ 2.76 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 56% | 61% | ▼ 41% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 72% | 66% | ▼ 59% |
| Clean sheets | • 22% | 22% | ▼ 18% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 67% | 75% | ▲ 82% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 78% | 84% | ▼ 82% |
^ 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
Substitutes
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): Toronto II 2 - 1 - 1 FC Cincinnati II. Average goals 2.25, both teams scored in 25% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Toronto II vs FC Cincinnati II?
The MLS Next Pro match finished Toronto II 3:1 FC Cincinnati 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 Toronto II and FC Cincinnati II?
In the last 4 head-to-head matches Toronto II won 2, FC Cincinnati II won 1 and 1 ended level. These games averaged 2.25 goals, with both teams scoring in 25% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Toronto II vs FC Cincinnati II?
Toronto II score 1.50 goals per game on average and FC Cincinnati II 0.94. The MLS Next Pro average is 3.24 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 66% of games. Both teams score in 56% of Toronto II's matches and 41% of FC Cincinnati II's.
What form are Toronto II and FC Cincinnati II in?
Over the last 5 games Toronto II have a 0-0-5 record (0.00 points per game) and FC Cincinnati II 1-1-3 (0.80 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Toronto II vs FC Cincinnati II?
Here you can check the pre-match numbers for Toronto II vs FC Cincinnati II: form, H2H, goals and Over/Under. The pick itself, value and reasoning are published in the NoFluffPicks app.


