San Jose’s 10-point advantage faces Austin’s home test
An in-depth analysis of the tactical battle ahead

Austin

San Jose Earthquakes
Austin seek a home response
Austin welcome San Jose Earthquakes to Q2 Stadium on Sunday with a significant gap to close in the Western Conference. Austin sit 14th with 24 points from 22 matches, while San Jose are fourth on 34 points. Vancouver Whitecaps lead the league with 43 points, leaving Austin 19 points off the top and San Jose nine behind.
The standings give both teams a clear incentive. Austin need to turn home performances into a sustained push up the table, while San Jose can strengthen their position near the leading group with another result on the road. The visitors’ away record is particularly encouraging: six wins, two draws and three defeats from 11 matches.
Contrasting momentum
Austin’s latest result was a win, but their wider sequence remains uneven. Their 22-match form list includes only two wins in the most recent five games, alongside a draw and three defeats. That inconsistency has contributed to a 6-6-10 league record and a negative goal difference of 13.
San Jose arrive with stronger momentum. Their latest three results were wins, and they have collected four victories in their last five matches. Their overall record of 10 wins, four draws and eight losses reflects a side that has generally converted promising periods into points, although the two consecutive defeats earlier in that recent sequence show that their run is not without interruption.
Formation battle at Q2 Stadium
Austin’s most-used shape is a 4-4-2, deployed in nine matches, with the 4-2-3-1 used five times. Their home numbers suggest a relatively controlled platform: 14 goals scored, 10 conceded and four clean sheets across 10 games. Austin may therefore look to use the two central forwards of the 4-4-2 to keep San Jose’s back line occupied, while protecting a home defensive record that has conceded an average of 1.00 goal per match.
San Jose have shown a much clearer tactical preference, using the 4-2-3-1 in 19 matches. That structure offers a consistent framework for their away approach, where they have scored 20 goals at an average of 1.80 per game. Austin’s midfield will need to manage the visitors’ extra attacking connection behind the forward, while San Jose’s two-man base can help them handle the hosts’ direct threat. San Jose have also kept three away clean sheets, though their 14 goals conceded on the road indicate Austin should find opportunities.
Absences add another variable
San Jose’s available options are reduced by several listed absences. N. Adimabua, E. Edwards and D. Johnson are unavailable with lower-body injuries, while D. Jones is missing with an Achilles tendon injury and T. Werner is also out. The losses of D. Jones and T. Werner are particularly notable names within the unavailable group, and the absences could encourage San Jose to rely on the familiarity of their established 4-2-3-1.
Prediction
Austin 1-2 San Jose Earthquakes. San Jose’s superior league position, stronger recent momentum and productive away record give them the edge, although Austin’s home defensive numbers should keep the score close.
By the numbers
The data behind Austin vs San Jose Earthquakes, in 4 charts.
The season so far
Wins, draws and losses side by side
Two different teams?
Home and away form for Austin
Who wins more often?
Share of league games won this season
How they line up
Most-used formations this season
The table as it stands
| Logo | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vancouver Whitecaps | WWLWD | 21 | 13 | 4 | 4 | 48 | 18 | 43 | |
| 2 | Houston Dynamo | DLWWW | 22 | 12 | 3 | 7 | 30 | 26 | 39 | |
| 3 | Los Angeles FC | DDLLD | 23 | 10 | 6 | 7 | 36 | 22 | 36 | |
| 4 | San Jose Earthquakes | DLLLL | 22 | 10 | 4 | 8 | 39 | 33 | 34 | |
| 5 | FC Dallas | DLWWD | 22 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 41 | 37 | 34 | |
| 6 | St. Louis City | DWDWD | 22 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 33 | 30 | 34 | |
| 7 | Colorado Rapids | WLWWW | 22 | 10 | 1 | 11 | 31 | 28 | 31 | |
| 8 | San Diego | WWLWD | 22 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 40 | 33 | 30 | |
| 9 | Minnesota United FC | DWLDD | 22 | 7 | 8 | 7 | 30 | 32 | 29 | |
| 10 | Real Salt Lake | LLLDD | 21 | 8 | 4 | 9 | 34 | 33 | 28 | |
| 11 | Portland Timbers | LDWLW | 22 | 8 | 4 | 10 | 39 | 39 | 28 | |
| 12 | Seattle Sounders | DDLLL | 21 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 24 | 29 | 26 | |
| 13 | Los Angeles Galaxy | LDWLD | 23 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 28 | 35 | 26 | |
| 14 | Austin | WDWLL | 22 | 6 | 6 | 10 | 28 | 41 | 24 | |
| 15 | Sporting Kansas City | LLDLL | 22 | 4 | 3 | 15 | 20 | 54 | 15 | |
| 1 | Nashville SC | DWWWW | 23 | 16 | 5 | 2 | 47 | 17 | 53 | |
| 2 | Inter Miami | WLDLD | 22 | 12 | 6 | 4 | 56 | 41 | 42 | |
| 3 | Chicago Fire | DDWWW | 21 | 11 | 4 | 6 | 39 | 28 | 37 | |
| 4 | New England Revolution | WDWLL | 22 | 11 | 4 | 7 | 36 | 27 | 37 | |
| 5 | Charlotte | WWDWL | 22 | 10 | 5 | 7 | 40 | 32 | 35 | |
| 6 | FC Cincinnati | LDWDW | 22 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 49 | 51 | 31 | |
| 7 | New York City FC | DDDLL | 23 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 36 | 31 | 29 | |
| 8 | New York Red Bulls | LDLLW | 22 | 7 | 5 | 10 | 32 | 46 | 26 | |
| 9 | Orlando City SC | DWLDL | 22 | 7 | 4 | 11 | 37 | 54 | 25 | |
| 10 | Toronto FC | DWDWD | 22 | 5 | 10 | 7 | 32 | 38 | 25 | |
| 11 | DC United | DLLDD | 22 | 5 | 10 | 7 | 28 | 36 | 25 | |
| 12 | Philadelphia Union | WDDWW | 22 | 6 | 6 | 10 | 34 | 39 | 24 | |
| 13 | Atlanta United FC | LWWWL | 22 | 6 | 3 | 13 | 25 | 38 | 21 | |
| 14 | CF Montreal | LDWDD | 22 | 5 | 6 | 11 | 30 | 46 | 21 | |
| 15 | Columbus Crew | LLLLD | 22 | 5 | 5 | 12 | 31 | 39 | 20 |