I'm not sure that's a thing as opposed to the small sample size explanation. But I'm not sure it's not a thing either. And if it is a real thing, I wonder whether it is a product of close run games that happen to go right or wrong, as opposed to some inherent character trait.
Seattle won its first MLS cup by playing for a 0-0 tie and winning on spot kicks. What if Toronto scores one single goal out of their 17 shots that were on target or blocked? Does Seattle have swagger for the next 4 years? Or is it a snake bit team that plays timidly and not to lose, as they did that first time they made the biggest game in MLS?
In both comparison and contrast, Vieira also managed NYCFC to play for a 0-0 draw in the team's first ever playoff game, and it backfired when Toronto scored twice late including an ugly extra time goal concession, and the second leg was on its way to fiasco 6 minutes in. But what if NYC holds on in the first leg, with just a bit more luck because Toronto blows a clear chance and/or better defensive concentration?
Then the next year NYC gets a red card handed to them early in game 1, and again concedes a ridiculous extra time goal. But they come sooo close in game 2, had lots of chances, and what if Villa for once won a playoff for us with a brace that game?
I mean, if either of those 2 series go differently, apart from the obvious effect on the record, does that prevent NYCFC from playing mistake-riddled, playoff games and consistently fail to convert chances for the next 4 years because they have the swagger of knowing they know how to win playoff games?
I honestly can't say if that's the sort of stories we tell ourselves to make sense of random events, or if it could be a real phenomenon.
PS: I always hated how PV had the team play in that first game.
