Menu

Chicago Fire vs New England Revolution

SeatGeek Stadium, Bridgeview7 September 2025 at 01:30
Referee: Guido Gonzales Jr

Match Events

Chicago Fire
New England Revolution
Kick Off
J. Bamba

assist: B. Gutierrez

2′
Half Time
H. Cuypers

assist: A. Franco

68′
69′
I. FeingoldW. Omsberg
69′
J. YueillA. Oyirwoth
J. BambaM. Haile-Selassie
76′
A. FrancoS. Oregel
76′
78′
P. Miller

assist: T. Chancalay

79′
L. LangoniB. Bye
B. GutierrezK. Acosta
83′
H. CuypersT. Barlow
83′
86′
T. BeasonW. Sands
S. RogersO. Gonzalez
90′
90′
C. Gil

Penalty

Full Time

Match Statistics

7Shots on Goal7
6Shots off Goal5
14Total Shots16
1Blocked Shots4
11Shots insidebox13
3Shots outsidebox3
8Fouls9
8Corner Kicks6
3Offsides2
53%Ball Possession47%
2Yellow Cards1
0Red Cards0
4Goalkeeper Saves4
527Total passes472
453Passes accurate399
86%Passes %85%
1.98expected_goals2.57
-1goals_prevented-1

Lineups

Squad Ratings

The overall squad rating for Chicago Fire is 7.00, compared to 7.07 for New England Revolution. This metric is derived from each player's average match rating across all league appearances this season — anything above 7.00 is considered strong, while below 6.50 signals inconsistency. Chicago Fire's highest-rated starter is H. Cuypers (7.85), while New England Revolution's best-rated player is M. Turner (7.60).

Attacking Output

The starting XI of Chicago Fire have contributed 20 goals and 10 assists this season, led by H. Cuypers (13G). New England Revolution's starters account for 16 goals and 9 assists, spearheaded by C. Gil (5G). Goals reflect clinical finishing and chance creation, while assists highlight the ability to unlock defences through through-balls, crosses, and set pieces.

Defensive Solidity

Chicago Fire deploy 4 defenders rated 6.68 on average, against New England Revolution's 4-man backline averaging 6.95. Higher defensive ratings suggest better positional awareness, fewer individual errors, and a greater likelihood of keeping clean sheets. The rating accounts for tackles won, interceptions, aerial duels, and blocks throughout the season.

Midfield Control

Chicago Fire field 3 midfielders averaging 6.75, versus New England Revolution's 4 rated 6.89. Midfield ratings reflect passing accuracy, interceptions, key passes, and overall control of possession — the team that dominates midfield typically dictates the tempo and territory of the match.

Forward Threat

Chicago Fire start 3 forward(s) averaging 7.48, compared to 2 for New England Revolution averaging 7.56. Forward ratings capture shot accuracy, movement off the ball, dribbling success, and involvement in build-up play — they indicate who carries the greater goal threat on the day.

Passing & Build-Up

Passing accuracy averages 80% for Chicago Fire and 82% for New England Revolution. Higher passing accuracy generally indicates a possession-based style with patient build-up through the thirds, while lower figures may suggest a more direct, counter-attacking approach with long balls and quick transitions.

Discipline

Chicago Fire's starters have collected 17 yellow cards this season, compared to 8 for New England Revolution. Yellow cards reflect how aggressively a team presses and tackles — a high count may indicate a physical, high-pressing style but also risks suspensions and late free-kicks in dangerous areas.

Age & Experience

The average age of Chicago Fire's starting XI is 27.1 (youngest: C. Brady (21), oldest: P. Zinckernagel (31)), while New England Revolution average 25.7 (youngest: P. Miller (18), oldest: C. Gil (33)). Younger squads typically offer pace, energy, and pressing intensity, while experienced lineups bring composure, game management, and the ability to handle high-pressure moments.

Squad Depth

Chicago Fire's starters average 10 league appearances each, versus 10 for New England Revolution. High appearance counts indicate an established, well-drilled unit that the manager trusts week in and week out. Lower figures may suggest rotation, injuries, or emerging players still earning their place in the team.

Chicago Fire4-3-34-4-2New England Revolution
GKDEFMIDFWD
1Brady24Dean5Rogers3Elliott15Gutman10Franco42D'Avilla17Gutierr.11Zincker.9Cuypers19Bamba30Turner12Feingold3Ceballos4Beason25Miller41Langoni14Yueill80Yusuf17Ganago7Chancal.10Gil

Substitutes

Coach: Mike Matkovich

Substitutes

Coach: Pablo Moreira

Chicago FirePosition StrengthNew England Revolution
7.00
Avg Rating
7.07
7.10Goalkeeper (1 v 1)7.60
0G 0A0G 0A
6.68Defender (4 v 4)6.95
0G 3A6G 0A
6.75Midfielder (3 v 4)6.89
0G 0A5G 6A
7.48Forward (3 v 2)7.56
20G 7A5G 3A
Chicago Fire4-3-3
1GoalkeeperC. Brady7.1
24DefenderJ. Dean6.6
5DefenderS. Rogers6.3
3DefenderJ. Elliott7.01A
15DefenderA. Gutman6.82A
10MidfielderA. Franco
42MidfielderD. D'Avilla6.8
17MidfielderB. Gutierrez
11ForwardP. Zinckernagel7.55G5A
9ForwardH. Cuypers7.813G
19ForwardJ. Bamba7.12G2A
New England Revolution4-4-2
30GoalkeeperM. Turner7.6
12DefenderI. Feingold6.91G
3DefenderB. Ceballos7.32G
4DefenderT. Beason6.8
25DefenderP. Miller6.83G
41MidfielderL. Langoni7.03G6A
14MidfielderJ. Yueill6.6
80MidfielderA. Yusuf7.12G
17MidfielderI. Ganago
7ForwardT. Chancalay
10ForwardC. Gil7.65G3A

Match Summary

Chicago Fire defeated New England Revolution 3:2. The match was played in Major League Soccer 2025. Goals were scored by J. Bamba 2′, P. Zinckernagel 10′, H. Cuypers 68′, P. Miller 78′, C. Gil 90′ (pen.). 3 yellow cards were shown. Chicago Fire had 53% possession while New England Revolution held 47%. Chicago Fire had 14 shots (7 on target) compared to 16 (7 on target) for New England Revolution. Expected goals: Chicago Fire 1.98 — New England Revolution 2.57. Chicago Fire made 5 substitutions, New England Revolution made 4.

Rivalry since 2012

Chicago Fire vs New England Revolution Head to Head Results

36 stretnutí
Chicago Fire
10
wins
Drawn
13
New England Revolution
13
wins
Total goals
106 · 2.9/match
Both scored
24/36 · 67%
Over 2.5
21/36 · 58%

Recent Meetings

Highest-scoring game: 33 v 2023

Recent Form

Chicago Fire

WWLLLW

New England Revolution

WLWWLD
Statistics are for informational purposes only. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

API data: 11 May 2026