It was the kind of situation that screamed “big game,” a few weeks ago. Leeds United were on 72 points and top of the English Championship, but only two points ahead of their closest pursuer, Sheffield United. Leeds travelled to Sheffield with the chance to not just stay top but create a bit of a cushion with a win over their Yorkshire rivals.
It was a hell of a game – Sheffield scored early in the first half (on an own goal attributed to Leeds’ keeper) and looked poised to hold off the visitors. Until the 72d minute, after which Leeds went on a run that created three goals unanswered. At the end of the night it was a 3-1 win and a five-point gap at the top. Surely, that’s the makings of a big game right?
Maybe not.
Over the next two games, by definition against teams lower down in the table, Leeds managed only a point, while Sheffield United bagged six. As a result, things are all tied up at the top of the standings just two weeks later (as I’m writing, Leeds is on top on goal differential). All this got me thinking about whether, in European soccer at least, there are such things as big games.”
The issue comes down to the league format that’s utilized in the big leagues in Europe. Rather than the typical American setup of a regular season followed by playoffs where a champion is crowned, in those leagues every team plays every other team twice (home and away), with the team that earns the most points (three for win, one for a draw) over the course of the season winning the title. It prioritizes sustained excellence at the expense of not having those do-or-die playoff games at the end of the season.
As a result, I’m not sure big games really matter. Every game is a potential three points gained or lost, regardless of the quality of opponent. This theory first sprouted in my mind last year, given how well Leeds did against the top teams in the Championship, only to fail to win promotion to the Premier League. Leeds finished third, behind Leicester City and Ipswich Town – who, in four games, Leeds defeated four times (ironically, the team that beat Leeds in the promotion playoff final, Southampton, beat Leeds twice during the regular season). Those were the big games last season, but in the end they didn’t matter anymore than losing at home to Blackburn (who finished 19th) and dropping points to Sheffield Wednesday (20th) and Sunderland (16th), among others. It was Leeds’ performance against lower table teams that mattered, in other words.
The same thing might be happening this season. Leeds’ record against the other top teams in the Championship is pretty good – three wins, two draws, and a loss. Certainly good enough to win promotion, you’d expect. But they’ve also dropped points to teams currently in 19th and 16th places, which might matter more in the end.
But maybe this is just a Leeds thing that I’m particularly attuned to as a fan. To check, let’s look at the past few seasons in the Premier League and the big games there.
Last season, Manchester City beat Arsenal to the title by two points – even though Arsenal beat them once and their other match up was a draw. What mattered more, in the end, was that Arsenal was tripped up by 13th-place Fulham twice during the season (one loss, one draw). By contrast, the year prior Manchester City’s five-point margin at the end of the season was certainly bolstered by beating Arsenal twice. The year before that, Liverpool triumphed by a single point over Manchester City, even though they drew both times they played each other. It’s not a large sample, but it at least suggests that big games often aren’t (the two seasons before that were such blowouts that there’s no point in analyzing them).
Is that enough data to draw any conclusions? Of course not, but I’m going to, anyway. I don’t see anything here that persuades me that big games mean anything over the course of long seasons like these. There are almost always other games against lesser opponents where one team slips up and the other doesn’t and those matter just as much in the end. The equivalence I’m thinking of is when somebody misses a last-second jumper or field goal and they get all the blame for a loss, when in fact there were mistakes and missed opportunities all through the game that made the last-ditch effort necessary in the first place. Are there seasons so close where defeating your closest rival head to head will make the difference? Sure, but I think those are more rare than fans would like to admit.
None of which is to say there aren’t big games for other reasons, such as rivalry/derby matches, or in other competitions – by definition every game in the FA Cup or March Madness is a big game, because if you lose you’re done. But leagues like the Championship or Premier League require a longer view.
If nothing else, it’ll lower your blood pressure from stressing over the next big game.



















