Regression means something different in statistics than it does in layman’s terms. Most of the time when you hear “regress,” you assume it’s the antonym of “progress.” Which is kind of applicable to Louisville City’s situation last week. In statistical modeling, though, regression analysis is a set of statistical processes for estimating the relationships among variables. In its most basic application, you plot out data points on a graph and then try to find a line that best fits those points. Then, depending on how closely that line fits the points, you can start making guesses on future outcomes using the formula you used to make the line.

I hated statistics in college, ironically enough, and reading that last sentence I wrote reminds me why.

Louisville City lost to the worst team in the league on Tuesday last week, and lost handily. Then they had to come back twice to preserve a point against Charleston Battery on Friday. City scored three goals and gave up six in that stretch. This poor run of form came a week after Morados had picked up seven of a possible nine points and scored nine goals while conceding zero. Going into the week, City was in second place with games in hand on FC Cincinnati and looked primed to start eating into the Stabby Soccer Lions’ lead. Exiting the week, that goal looks as good as shot.

According to FiveThirtyEight.com’s match predictor, City had a three percent chance of losing that TFC II match. Three. Percent. City had nearly 70% of the ball, won nearly 70% of the balls in the air, and out-shot the Little Reds 22-8. Only six of those 22 shots were on target, though, while Toronto was a much more efficient five of eight. Despite lacking much of the ball, TFCII got into some pretty dangerous areas in the City box, and got the goals to show for it. City, to be fair, had 33 touches in Toronto’s box and only scored once.

The conclusions I draw from those numbers are these: Morados might have been a bit unlucky not to score more, but it’s inarguable that Toronto earned all four of their goals. The reason behind that, I think, is this:

James Sands was playing his third match in a week as a defensive midfielder. Rather than working in a double pivot with Speedy Williams, he generally stayed central between Sean Totsch and Alexis Souahy while Speedy kind of was on his own in actual central midfield. He was the lone conduit in the middle of the field between the centerbacks, Sands, and the attacking midfield. When City had the ball in the middle of the field, both Oscar and Kyle Smith would be pressed up high and Speedy was all by himself. Toronto figured this out pretty quick and swarmed all over Speedy every time he got the ball. The attackers were usually too high up the field to be an outlet, the central defenders were either too wide or too high up the field, and Sands was just in a line behind Speedy. The result was a turnover with just two of City’s defenders in any position to stop the resulting counterattack and easy layoffs to the Toronto wide left winger for a shot on goal with only Ranjitsingh to defend it. It worked every time, first with Speedy and then three more when Paolo came on for him in the second half.

The concerning thing was that nothing was done to fix it. When Paolo came on for Speedy, it was just a personnel change and not a systematic one. Toronto scored the same way three more times.

We saw it again on Charleston’s first goal on Friday, just with slightly different personnel. City had almost 70% of the ball, passed it very, very well, but got hit on a counter and then a scramble in front of Greg’s goal. This time, though, the midfield pair of Paolo and Speedy was back, and the number six destroyer was gone because that’s not how Paolo and Speedy play.

Neither Paolo nor Speedy are really defensive midfielders. The way City dealt with that in the recent past was playing three centerbacks with Totsch in the middle. Totsch is a good centerback, but he’s got good central defensive mid chops. He’s also not afraid to take a few dribbles up the center of the field, either. So when City plays a back three, Totsch kind of functions as a central defensive midfielder so both fullbacks/wingbacks can get up the field and it’s harder to catch them on the counter. But when you take one of those centerbacks away, the outside backs stay high up the field, and you have Paolo and Speedy playing a sort-of double pivot, then when they turn the ball over near the center circle, you’ve just got two centerbacks to stop the counter. We’ve seen this show lots of times over the years, and it’s the reason O’Connor went to a back three in the first place. We didn’t have a real number six on the roster, so he had Totsch fill a hybrid role that usually worked.

That’s what happened. Fatigue might have something to do with hit, but in my eyes the goals City surrendered were just due to a big hole between the centerbacks that either Sands was too tired or too high up the field to fill or wasn’t filled at all.

There were some good things about both games, especially Charleston, in terms of passing, especially in the opposing half. The problem was both opponents were more than happy to let City have the ball because Morados couldn’t unlock their defenses. I’m not 100% clear on how to fix that.

Anyway, that was a less than fun week. What would fix it would be three points against whomever we play on Saturday. Let’s do it.