MLS Cup Playoffs - November 30 - New England (Away)

It’s so MLSy to not have these games on the same day or at least the same weekend. I would even understand Sunday/Monday. What’s the reasoning behind costing us or NE 2 rest days in a playoff series? It’s stuff like this that undermines the legitimacy of the league. Throw parity out the window. In the biggest competition this league has and the one thing teams spend their entire season fighting for there should be an effort to create an equal competition.


Isn’t this because of the Patriots and Titans?
 
It's always done for TV, subject only to stadium availability. Having 2 games each on Monday and Tuesday means all night games and the West games have close to zero East coast viewership. Even MLS is better off having NFL competition rather than write off the 60-70% of the country who live in the East and Central time zones. I watched Colorado-Portland on Thanksgiving, and SKC-RSL yesterday. I would not watch either starting at 10 pm tonight or tomorrow.

And all sports do this. It's just that MLS has to compromise more because of lower status in the US and stadium issues.
 
Last edited:
It’s so MLSy to not have these games on the same day or at least the same weekend. I would even understand Sunday/Monday. What’s the reasoning behind costing us or NE 2 rest days in a playoff series? It’s stuff like this that undermines the legitimacy of the league. Throw parity out the window. In the biggest competition this league has and the one thing teams spend their entire season fighting for there should be an effort to create an equal competition.

The specific issue with our game is that the Patriots were home on Sunday. Presumably they need a couple days to turn the stadium around.
 
This game is the definition of house money. If you lose, you just lost to the best team in MLS history playing on their plastic crap field. No one has given you a shot to win this game.

That said, there has not been a single upset so far in the Eastern conference as every higher seeded team has won. Chaos prevails in MLS.

An MLS ending to this game would be it going six rounds of penalties where Maxi hits Turner in the head, the ball pops up and rolls into the net to give NYCFC the win. Chaos, baby, chaos.
 
Please no penalties. I’d rather lose 5-0. Or 2-1 in extra time after having taken a lead. Just no penalties.
Yeah, we're held 30 minutes after the final whistle before leaving the stadium. So extra time plus penalties plus those 30 minutes means not getting back home until like 3 AM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert
FiveThirtyEight has it as New England 53% - NYCFC 47%

BetMGM has New England +105, NYCFC +230, Draw (90 minutes) +260
Am I correct in deducing that -- according to 538 -- NYCFC is a very good play? If you can get steady +$230 payouts on teams who [actually] win 47% of the time, you'll do well. I figure you'd end up $810 ahead after making a hundred $100 bets. The key is that 538 is correct and the teams must, in fact, win those 47 times.

ETA:
Yeah that was completely wrong, because I don't bet and none of this comes naturally to me. I think what I meant to say was that betting on NYC means you would lose a lot less than someone betting on New England would in the same scenario. Frankly the sports betting math turns my head around in ways that is unsettling considering my facility with figures elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Schwallacus
Am I correct in deducing that -- according to 538 -- NYCFC is a very good play? If you can get steady +$230 payouts on teams who [actually] win 47% of the time, you'll do well. I figure you'd end up $810 ahead after making a hundred $100 bets. The key is that 538 is correct and the teams must, in fact, win those 47 times.
Never bet on MLS
 
Am I correct in deducing that -- according to 538 -- NYCFC is a very good play? If you can get steady +$230 payouts on teams who [actually] win 47% of the time, you'll do well. I figure you'd end up $810 ahead after making a hundred $100 bets. The key is that 538 is correct and the teams must, in fact, win those 47 times.

Draws need to be considered. Traditional soccer has a three way money line - win, win, draw - that is based on regular time only. The 538 model is (I assume) based on advancing and includes extra time scenarios.

NYCFC is still likely a good play, but the projected payout would be lower. I believe that 1 in 4 matches in English soccer leagues end in draws. I'll defer to someone more mathematically capable than I am, but I'd suspect the expected payout would be based on 35 wins out of 100 rather than 47. Still should be a profitable return in theory if you believe the 538 projection.
 
Never bet on MLS
Draws need to be considered. Traditional soccer has a three way money line - win, win, draw - that is based on regular time only. The 538 model is (I assume) based on advancing and includes extra time scenarios.

NYCFC is still likely a good play, but the projected payout would be lower. I believe that 1 in 4 matches in English soccer leagues end in draws. I'll defer to someone more mathematically capable than I am, but I'd suspect the expected payout would be based on 35 wins out of 100 rather than 47. Still should be a profitable return in theory if you believe the 538 projection.
Plus I completely messed up the computation above and I completely revised the post. I should just stop trying to calculate sports betting. I frankly don't care enough to have it come naturally and will get it wrong too often.
That said, the 538 model accounts for draws when possible. It is uncommon for one team to have a >50% chance of winning or losing any given regular season game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayH
Draws need to be considered. Traditional soccer has a three way money line - win, win, draw - that is based on regular time only. The 538 model is (I assume) based on advancing and includes extra time scenarios.

NYCFC is still likely a good play, but the projected payout would be lower. I believe that 1 in 4 matches in English soccer leagues end in draws. I'll defer to someone more mathematically capable than I am, but I'd suspect the expected payout would be based on 35 wins out of 100 rather than 47. Still should be a profitable return in theory if you believe the 538 projection.
Plus I completely messed up the computation above and I completely revised the post. I should just stop trying to calculate sports betting. I frankly don't care enough to have it come naturally and will get it wrong too often.
That said, the 538 model accounts for draws when possible. It is uncommon for one team to have a >50% chance of winning or losing any given regular season game.
The current FiveThirtyEight website doesn't show a draw for the individual match, so it's 53-47 to advance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert