Americans finally have found their own soft spot for the world’s most beloved professional sport. After what seemed an eternity of low popularity among U.S. fans, soccer — better known as “football” to the international community — has gained admiration and respect here at home.
Much of the credit for the sport’s growing domestic acceptance goes to the U.S. Women’s National Team, who made us proud with its record-breaking victory in the 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup. Part of the glory is also owed to COPA América Centenario, the world’s oldest soccer competition, held the following year on U.S. turf for the first time in its 100-year history. In 2019, the U.S. National Team won the FIFA Women’s World Cup once more, and last year they took home a bronze medal at the Tokyo Olympics. Most recently, the U.S. Men’s National Team has qualified for the 2022 World Cup.
Some places make it easier for soccer fans to enjoy the sport than others, though. To determine the top spots for soccer fandom, WalletHub compared more than 290 U.S. cities with at least one college or professional soccer team across five divisions and examined each based on 52 key metrics. Our data set ranges from minimum season-ticket price for a game to stadium accessibility to number of championship wins.
In light of the World Cup taking place this year, WalletHub also released its FIFA World Cup By The Numbers Infographic with fun stats about the competition.
Main Findings
Best Soccer Cities in America
Overall Rank | City | Total Score | MLS | NWSL | USL | College Soccer (Men) | College Soccer (Women) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Los Angeles, CA | 56.87 | 1 | 9 | 23 | 20 | 130 |
2 | Seattle, WA | 51.68 | 3 | 3 | 28 | 61 | 159 |
3 | Portland, OR | 50.3 | 9 | 1 | 28 | 143 | 47 |
4 | Orlando, FL | 43.28 | 6 | 4 | 28 | 78 | 119 |
5 | Kansas City, MO | 42.17 | 2 | 13 | 28 | 154 | 201 |
6 | Washington, DC | 41.9 | 7 | 7 | 28 | 34 | 92 |
7 | New York, NY | 41.25 | 8 | 11 | 25 | 4 | 15 |
8 | Atlanta, GA | 40.85 | 4 | 13 | 27 | 47 | 99 |
9 | Salt Lake City, UT | 37.44 | 5 | 13 | 28 | 170 | 156 |
10 | St. Paul, MN | 34.27 | 10 | 13 | 28 | 65 | 122 |
11 | Columbus, OH | 33.7 | 11 | 13 | 28 | 95 | 85 |
12 | Chicago, IL | 33.7 | 22 | 6 | 28 | 38 | 83 |
13 | Boston, MA | 33.24 | 12 | 13 | 28 | 27 | 21 |
14 | Miami, FL | 32.57 | 15 | 13 | 10 | 96 | 222 |
15 | Houston, TX | 32.57 | 18 | 10 | 28 | 89 | 118 |
16 | Philadelphia, PA | 30.96 | 17 | 13 | 28 | 8 | 9 |
17 | Cary, NC | 30.52 | 24 | 2 | 28 | 170 | 288 |
18 | Denver, CO | 30.13 | 13 | 13 | 28 | 134 | 161 |
19 | Dallas, TX | 29.82 | 16 | 13 | 28 | 42 | 60 |
20 | San Jose, CA | 28.97 | 14 | 13 | 28 | 161 | 257 |
21 | Louisville, KY | 28.43 | 24 | 8 | 1 | 126 | 174 |
22 | Cincinnati, OH | 28.04 | 19 | 13 | 28 | 108 | 104 |
23 | Nashville, TN | 26.78 | 21 | 13 | 28 | 86 | 32 |
24 | Austin, TX | 26.53 | 20 | 13 | 28 | 170 | 137 |
25 | Kansas City, KS | 21.17 | 24 | 5 | 28 | 170 | 288 |
26 | Charleston, SC | 18.25 | 24 | 13 | 3 | 133 | 46 |
27 | Hartford, CT | 17.22 | 24 | 13 | 7 | 114 | 86 |
28 | Birmingham, AL | 17.08 | 24 | 13 | 5 | 151 | 87 |
29 | Tulsa, OK | 16.86 | 24 | 13 | 13 | 30 | 97 |
30 | San Diego, CA | 16.83 | 24 | 12 | 26 | 102 | 164 |
Note: With the exception of “Total Score,” all of the columns in the table above depict the relative rank of that city, where a rank of 1 represents the best conditions for that metric category.

- Best-Performing
- 1. Philadelphia, PA
- 2. Seattle, WA
- 3. Portland, OR
- 4. Kansas City, MO
- 5. New York, NY

- Worst-Performing
- 18. Miami, FL
- 19. Austin, TX
- 20. Chicago, IL
- 21. Houston, TX
- 22. Cincinnati, OH

- Best-Performing
- 1. Cary, NC
- 2. Portland, OR
- 3. Chicago, IL
- 4. Seattle, WA
- 5. Houston, TX

- Worst-Performing
- 6. Washington, DC
- 7. Orlando, FL
- 8. Louisville, KY
- 9. New York, NY
- 10. Kansas City, KS

- Lowest
- 1. Houston, TX
- 2. Denver, CO
- 3. Dallas, TX
- 4. Chicago, IL
- 5. Salt Lake City, UT

- Highest
- 19. Washington, DC
- 20. Austin, TX
- 21. Kansas City, MO
- 22. Atlanta, GA
- 23. Charlotte, NC

- Lowest
- 1. Chicago, IL
- 2. Cary, NC
- 3. Portland, OR
- 4. Kansas City, KS
- 5. Seattle, WA

- Highest
- 8. Louisville, KY
- 9. Los Angeles, CA
- 10. Houston, TX
- 11. Washington, DC
- 12. San Diego, CA

- Highest
- 1. Atlanta, GA
- 2. Salt Lake City, UT
- 3. Orlando, FL
- 4. Cincinnati, OH
- 5. Charlotte, NC

- Lowest
- 19. Dallas, TX
- 20. Los Angeles, CA
- 21. Philadelphia, PA
- 22. Houston, TX
- 23. New York, NY

- Highest
- 1. Kansas City, KS
- 2. Orlando, FL
- 3. Cary, NC
- 4. Portland, OR
- 5. Washington, DC

- Lowest
- 8. Seattle, WA
- 9. Houston, TX
- 10. Chicago, IL
- 11. Los Angeles, CA
- 12. New York, NY

- Most Engaged
- T-1. Orlando, FL
- T-1. Atlanta, GA
- 3. Salt Lake City, UT
- 4. Seattle, WA
- 5. Kansas City, MO

- Least Engaged
- 19. Philadelphia, PA
- 20. Nashville, TN
- 21. Chicago, IL
- 22. Austin, TX
- 23. Charlotte, NC

- Most Engaged
- T-1. Orlando, FL
- T-1. Seattle, WA
- T-1. Portland, OR
- 4. Washington, DC
- 5. Los Angeles, CA

- Least Engaged
- 4. Washington, DC
- 5. Los Angeles, CA
- 6. Houston, TX
- 7. Chicago, IL
- 8. New York, NY
Ranking by City Size
Rank (1=Best) |
Large City (Score) |
Rank (1=Best) |
Midsize City (Score) |
Rank (1=Best) |
Small City (Score) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Los Angeles, CA (56.87) | 1 | Orlando, FL (43.28) | 1 | Edinburg, TX (15.82) |
2 | Seattle, WA (51.68) | 2 | Salt Lake City, UT (37.44) | 2 | Clemson, SC (12.83) |
3 | Portland, OR (50.30) | 3 | Cary, NC (30.52) | 3 | Leesburg, VA (11.70) |
4 | Kansas City, MO (42.17) | 4 | Kansas City, KS (21.17) | 4 | Buies Creek, NC (11.29) |
5 | Washington, DC (41.90) | 5 | Charleston, SC (18.25) | 5 | Charlottesville, VA (11.12) |
6 | New York, NY (41.25) | 6 | Hartford, CT (17.22) | 6 | Chapel Hill, NC (11.12) |
7 | Atlanta, GA (40.85) | 7 | Birmingham, AL (17.08) | 7 | Seaside, CA (10.58) |
8 | St. Paul, MN (34.27) | 8 | Irvine, CA (16.47) | 8 | State College, PA (10.53) |
9 | Columbus, OH (33.70) | 9 | St. Petersburg, FL (14.05) | 9 | West Long Branch, NJ (10.02) |
10 | Chicago, IL (33.70) | 10 | Providence, RI (8.84) | 10 | Bloomington, IN (9.64) |
11 | Boston, MA (33.24) | 11 | Springfield, MO (8.01) | 11 | Morgantown, WV (9.54) |
12 | Miami, FL (32.57) | 12 | Greensboro, NC (7.77) | 12 | West Point, NY (9.47) |
13 | Houston, TX (32.57) | 13 | Dayton, OH (7.54) | 13 | Highland Heights, KY (9.40) |
14 | Philadelphia, PA (30.96) | 14 | Cambridge, MA (7.24) | 14 | Stanford, CA (9.28) |
15 | Denver, CO (30.13) | 15 | Des Moines, IA (7.01) | 15 | Princeton, NJ (8.85) |
16 | Dallas, TX (29.82) | 16 | Columbia, SC (7.01) | 16 | Boiling Springs, NC (8.84) |
17 | San Jose, CA (28.97) | 17 | Wilmington, NC (6.97) | 17 | Lewisburg, PA (8.84) |
18 | Louisville, KY (28.43) | 18 | South Bend, IN (6.85) | 18 | Kingston, RI (8.76) |
19 | Cincinnati, OH (28.04) | 19 | Buffalo, NY (6.78) | 19 | Radford, VA (8.60) |
20 | Nashville, TN (26.78) | 20 | Lowell, MA (6.49) | 20 | College Park, MD (8.44) |
21 | Austin, TX (26.53) | 21 | Richmond, VA (6.48) | 21 | Hempstead, NY (8.40) |
22 | Tulsa, OK (16.86) | 22 | High Point, NC (6.40) | 22 | Annapolis, MD (8.20) |
23 | San Diego, CA (16.83) | 23 | Fort Wayne, IN (6.21) | 23 | Storrs, CT (8.18) |
24 | Pittsburgh, PA (16.78) | 24 | Santa Clara, CA (6.16) | 24 | Conway, SC (8.11) |
25 | Sacramento, CA (16.09) | 25 | Winston-Salem, NC (6.08) | 25 | Hamilton, NY (8.02) |
26 | Indianapolis, IN (15.20) | 26 | Jersey City, NJ (6.07) | 26 | New Brunswick, NJ (7.91) |
27 | Memphis, TN (14.92) | 27 | Akron, OH (5.80) | 27 | DeKalb, IL (7.72) |
28 | Colorado Springs, CO (14.56) | 28 | Green Bay, WI (5.51) | 28 | Fairfield, CT (7.69) |
29 | Detroit, MI (14.32) | 29 | Spokane, WA (5.31) | 29 | Bowling Green, OH (7.69) |
30 | Las Vegas, NV (14.03) | 30 | Fullerton, CA (5.08) | 30 | Greenville, SC (7.64) |
31 | Charlotte, NC (13.55) | 31 | Norfolk, VA (5.06) | 31 | Hamden, CT (7.60) |
32 | Albuquerque, NM (13.09) | 32 | Durham, NC (4.98) | 32 | Allegany, NY (7.53) |
33 | San Antonio, TX (12.57) | 33 | Ann Arbor, MI (4.73) | 33 | Conway, AR (7.52) |
34 | El Paso, TX (12.33) | 34 | Berkeley, CA (4.64) | 34 | Harrisonburg, VA (7.48) |
35 | Phoenix, AZ (11.93) | 35 | Madison, WI (4.60) | 35 | Lawrence, NJ (7.47) |
36 | St. Louis, MO (8.48) | 36 | Macon-Bibb County, GA (4.59) | 36 | Amherst, MA (7.40) |
37 | Oakland, CA (8.00) | 37 | Knoxville, TN (4.46) | 37 | New Britain, CT (7.38) |
38 | Riverside, CA (7.55) | 38 | Gainesville, FL (4.32) | 38 | Hackensack, NJ (7.32) |
39 | Milwaukee, WI (7.33) | 39 | New Haven, CT (4.21) | 39 | Easton, PA (7.30) |
40 | Baltimore, MD (7.17) | 40 | Abilene, TX (4.18) | 40 | Spartanburg, SC (7.18) |
41 | Raleigh, NC (6.99) | 41 | Greeley, CO (3.85) | 41 | Smithfield, RI (7.17) |
42 | Tampa, FL (6.90) | 42 | Mobile, AL (3.83) | 42 | Farmville, VA (7.13) |
43 | Cleveland, OH (6.50) | 42 | Provo, UT (3.83) | 43 | Bethlehem, PA (7.07) |
44 | Jacksonville, FL (6.50) | 44 | College Station, TX (3.74) | 44 | Newark, DE (6.86) |
45 | Stockton, CA (6.10) | 45 | Chattanooga, TN (3.73) | 45 | Fairfax, VA (6.85) |
46 | Lexington-Fayette, KY (5.53) | 46 | Fargo, ND (3.72) | 46 | Lynchburg, VA (6.84) |
47 | Omaha, NE (4.37) | 47 | Tallahassee, FL (3.70) | 47 | Kalamazoo, MI (6.81) |
48 | Bakersfield, CA (4.06) | 48 | Athens, GA (3.53) | 48 | Durham, NH (6.68) |
49 | Honolulu, HI (3.73) | 49 | Syracuse, NY (3.43) | 49 | Fort Myers, FL (6.64) |
50 | San Francisco, CA (3.67) | 50 | Clarksville, TN (3.32) | 50 | Hanover, NH (6.52) |
51 | Fort Worth, TX (2.71) | 51 | Beaumont, TX (3.24) | 51 | Lewiston, NY (6.41) |
52 | Tucson, AZ (2.67) | 52 | Waco, TX (3.15) | 52 | Williamsburg, VA (6.38) |
53 | Long Beach, CA (2.56) | 53 | Newark, NJ (2.99) | 53 | Binghamton, NY (6.24) |
54 | Minneapolis, MN (2.56) | 54 | Worcester, MA (2.97) | 54 | San Luis Obispo, CA (6.13) |
55 | Fresno, CA (2.02) | 55 | Lincoln, NE (2.96) | 55 | Loretto, PA (6.10) |
56 | Corpus Christi, TX (1.55) | 56 | Lubbock, TX (2.96) | 56 | Stony Brook, NY (5.97) |
Info | Info | 57 | Denton, TX (2.88) | 57 | Davidson, NC (5.86) |
Info | Info | 58 | Evansville, IN (2.84) | 58 | Orem, UT (5.83) |
Info | Info | 59 | Baton Rouge, LA (2.64) | 59 | Evanston, IL (5.81) |
Info | Info | 60 | Eugene, OR (2.50) | 60 | Rock Hill, SC (5.80) |
Info | Info | 61 | Boulder, CO (2.50) | 61 | Charleston, IL (5.77) |
Info | Info | 62 | Norman, OK (2.40) | 62 | Moraga, CA (5.72) |
Info | Info | 63 | Tuscaloosa, AL (2.33) | 63 | Huntington, WV (5.55) |
Info | Info | 64 | Boise, ID (2.32) | 64 | Malibu, CA (5.32) |
Info | Info | 65 | Murfreesboro, TN (2.16) | 65 | Santa Barbara, CA (5.24) |
Info | Info | 66 | Peoria, IL (2.12) | 66 | Corvallis, OR (5.24) |
Info | Info | 67 | Montgomery, AL (2.04) | 67 | Elon, NC (5.18) |
Info | Info | 68 | Columbia, MO (1.96) | 68 | Oxford, MS (5.06) |
Info | Info | 69 | Tempe, AZ (1.92) | 69 | Emmitsburg, MD (4.93) |
Info | Info | 70 | Huntsville, AL (1.90) | 70 | East Lansing, MI (4.81) |
Info | Info | 71 | Fort Collins, CO (1.77) | 71 | Auburn, AL (4.73) |
Info | Info | 72 | Lafayette, LA (1.71) | 72 | Clinton, SC (4.71) |
Info | Info | 73 | Toledo, OH (1.64) | 73 | Martin, TN (4.58) |
Info | Info | 74 | Reno, NV (1.56) | 74 | Statesboro, GA (4.58) |
Info | Info | 75 | Little Rock, AR (1.45) | 75 | Edwardsville, IL (4.53) |
Info | Info | 76 | Jackson, MS (1.30) | 76 | Blacksburg, VA (4.47) |
Info | Info | 77 | Las Cruces, NM (1.16) | 77 | Kent, OH (4.39) |
Info | Info | 78 | Hampton, VA (0.74) | 78 | Rochester, MI (4.39) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 79 | Albany, NY (4.36) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 80 | Fayetteville, AR (4.36) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 81 | Murray, KY (4.26) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 82 | Muncie, IN (4.25) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 83 | Ypsilanti, MI (4.19) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 84 | North Andover, MA (4.17) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 85 | Nacogdoches, TX (4.07) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 86 | Bowling Green, KY (4.07) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 87 | Iowa City, IA (4.07) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 88 | Orono, ME (4.03) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 89 | Athens, OH (4.03) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 90 | Kennesaw, GA (4.01) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 91 | Burlington, VT (4.00) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 92 | Normal, IL (3.92) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 93 | Asheville, NC (3.90) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 94 | West Lafayette, IN (3.89) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 95 | Stillwater, OK (3.86) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 96 | Boone, NC (3.85) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 97 | Huntsville, TX (3.85) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 97 | Valparaiso, IN (3.85) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 99 | Starkville, MS (3.82) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 100 | Mount Pleasant, MI (3.82) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 101 | Boca Raton, FL (3.80) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 102 | Poughkeepsie, NY (3.75) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 103 | Hammond, LA (3.70) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 104 | Davis, CA (3.70) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 105 | Ithaca, NY (3.69) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 106 | Brookings, SD (3.65) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 107 | Cape Girardeau, MO (3.64) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 108 | Logan, UT (3.61) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 109 | Cookeville, TN (3.60) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 110 | Macomb, IL (3.52) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 111 | Grand Forks, ND (3.46) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 112 | Orangeburg, SC (3.36) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 113 | Prairie View, TX (3.30) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 114 | South Orange Village, NJ (3.27) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 115 | Lawrence, KS (3.23) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 116 | Johnson City, TN (3.22) |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 117 | Morehead, KY |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 118 | Pullman, WA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 119 | Thibodaux, LA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 120 | Cullowhee, NC |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 121 | Lake Charles, LA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 122 | Flagstaff, AZ |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 123 | New Rochelle, NY |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 124 | Lexington, VA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 125 | Pine Bluff, AR |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 126 | Vermillion, SD |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 127 | Greenville, NC |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 128 | Laramie, WY |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 129 | DeLand, FL |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 130 | Natchitoches, LA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 131 | Ogden, UT |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 132 | Manhattan, KS |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 133 | Ruston, LA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 134 | Champaign, IL |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 135 | Hattiesburg, MS |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 136 | San Marcos, TX |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 137 | Missoula, MT |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 138 | Grambling, LA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 139 | Jonesboro, AR |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 140 | Cheney, WA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 141 | Itta Bena, MS |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 142 | Moscow, ID |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 143 | Terre Haute, IN |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 144 | Carbondale, IL |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 145 | Oxford, OH |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 146 | Jacksonville, AL |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 147 | Cedar City, UT |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 148 | Cedar Falls, IA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 149 | Troy, AL |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 150 | Florence, AL |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 150 | Fayette, MS |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 152 | Coral Gables, FL |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 153 | Ames, IA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 154 | Pocatello, ID |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 155 | St. George, UT |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 156 | Towson, MD |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 157 | Monroe, LA |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 158 | Youngstown, OH |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 159 | Dover, DE |
Info | Info | Info | Info | 160 | Richmond, KY |
Ask the Experts
Soccer is evolving, which is evident not only in rising attendance and viewership rates but also in the emergence of new sports TV networks and soccer clubs. For additional insight into soccer-related issues and trends, we turned to a panel of leading sports experts. Click on the experts’ profiles below to read their bios and thoughts on the following key questions:
- What are the biggest issues facing U.S. soccer today?
- What is the long-term outlook for professional soccer in the U.S.?
- To what extent has U.S. soccer embraced fantasy sports, including the daily-fantasy model?
- What, in your mind, makes a good soccer fan?
- If your child were an elite youth soccer player, would you encourage them to pursue the MLS/NWSL or a premier international league?
Ask the Experts
Head Coach, Men's Soccer Program – University of Central Arkansas
Read More
Assistant Professor, Sport Administration – University of Louisville
Read More
Ph.D. – Associate Professor and Program Director, Sport and Recreation Administration, Department of Health, Exercise Science, and Recreation Management – The University of Mississippi
Read More
Lecturer, Sport and Recreation Management – University of Iowa
Read More
Ph.D. – Assistant Professor of Practice, Department of Marketing, College of Business – University of Texas at San Antonio
Read More
M.S., J.D. – Associate Professor of Sports Management, Director, Ice Hockey – Lynn University
Read More
Methodology
In order to determine the best cities for soccer fans, WalletHub compared 294 of the most populated U.S. cities across five divisions: 1) MLS (Division I Men’s), 2) NWSL (Division I Women’s), 3) USL (Division III Men’s), 4) College Soccer (Division I Men’s) and 5) College Soccer (Division I Women’s). For our sample, we chose cities with at least one college or professional soccer team.
We evaluated the five divisions using 52 relevant metrics, which are listed below with their corresponding weights. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the most favorable conditions for soccer fans. In order to determine the weight for each division, we surveyed the top-performing five teams in each division’s Facebook account, summed the number of “Likes” and calculated the proportion that each league represented in total. The weight attributed to each division is therefore based on its popularity.
Finally, we determined each city’s weighted average across all metrics to calculate its overall score and used the resulting scores to rank-order the cities in our sample.
We also ranked the cities based on population size, using the following groupings:
- Large Cities: More than 300,000 people
- Midsize Cities: 100,000 to 300,000 people
- Small Cities: Fewer than 100,000 people
MLS (Div. I Men’s) – Total Points = 55
- Number of Teams: Full Weight (~6.47 Points)
- Performance Level: Full Weight (~6.47 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing the number of wins by the total games played. The past three seasons’ average was used for this calculation. - Number of Championship Wins: Full Weight (~6.47 Points)
- Number of Regular Season Conference (2 conferences) Titles: Half Weight (~3.24 Points)
- Number of Hall of Fame Head Coaches who Conducted the Team: Half Weight (~3.24 Points)
- Franchise Value: Half Weight (~3.24 Points)
Note: This metric measures the team’s estimated value in millions of dollars. - Minimum Season-Ticket Price: Full Weight (~6.47 Points)
- Fan Engagement: Full Weight (~6.47 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by adding the number of Twitter followers and the number of Facebook “Likes” per capita. - Number of Coaches in Past 10 Seasons (Seasons 2012-13 to 2021-22): Half Weight (~3.24 Points)
- Stadium Capacity: Half Weight (~3.24 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing stadium capacity by city population. - Attendance: Half Weight (~3.24 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing average home-fan attendance by arena capacity. - Popularity Index: Half Weight (~3.24 Points)
NWSL (Div. I Women’s) – Total Points = 25
- Number of Teams: Full Weight (~3.13 Points)
- Performance Level: Full Weight (~3.13 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing the number of wins by the total games played. The past three seasons’ average was used for this calculation. - Number of Championship Wins: Full Weight (~3.13 Points)
- Number of Regular Season League Titles: Half Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Number of Hall of Fame Head Coaches who Conducted the Team: Half Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Minimum Season-Ticket Price: Full Weight (~3.13 Points)
- Fan Engagement: Full Weight (~3.13 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by adding the number of Twitter followers and the number of Facebook “Likes” per capita. - Number of Coaches in Past 10 Seasons (Seasons 2012-13 to 2021-22): Half Weight (~1.56 Points)
- Stadium Capacity: Half Weight (~1.56 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing stadium capacity by city population. - Attendance: Half Weight (~1.56 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing average home-fan attendance by arena capacity. - Popularity Index: Half Weight (~1.56 Points)
USL (Div. III Men’s) – Total Points = 10
- Number of Teams: Full Weight (~1.25 Points)
- Performance Level: Full Weight (~1.25 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing the number of wins by the total games played. The past three seasons’ average was used for this calculation. - Number of Championship Wins: Full Weight (~1.25 Points)
- Number of Regular Season Conference (2 conferences) Titles: Half Weight (~0.63 Points)
- Number of Hall of Fame Head Coaches who Conducted the Team: Half Weight (~0.63 Points)
- Minimum Season-Ticket Price: Full Weight (~1.25 Points)
- Fan Engagement: Full Weight (~1.25 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by adding the number of Twitter followers and the number of Facebook “Likes” per capita. - Number of Coaches in Past 10 Seasons (Seasons 2012-13 to 2021-22): Half Weight (~0.63 Points)
- Stadium Capacity: Half Weight (~0.63 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing stadium capacity by city population. - Attendance: Half Weight (~0.63 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing average home-fan attendance by arena capacity. - Popularity Index: Half Weight (~0.63 Points)
College Soccer (Div. I Men’s) – Total Points = 5
- Number of Teams: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
- Performance Level: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing the number of wins by the total games played. The past three seasons’ average was used for this calculation. - Number of Championship Wins: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
- Number of Conference Regular Season Titles: Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
- Number of Hall of Fame Head Coaches who Conducted the Team: Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
- Minimum Season-Ticket Price: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
- Fan Engagement: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by adding the number of Twitter followers and the number of Facebook “Likes” per capita. - Number of Coaches in Past 10 Seasons (Seasons 2012-13 to 2021-22): Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
- Stadium Capacity: Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing stadium capacity by city population.
College Soccer (Div. I Women’s) – Total Points = 5
- Number of Teams: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
- Performance Level: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing the number of wins by the total games played. The past three seasons’ average was used for this calculation. - Number of Championship Wins: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
- Number of Conference Regular Season Titles: Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
- Number of Hall of Fame Head Coaches who Conducted the Team: Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
- Minimum Season-Ticket Price: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
- Fan Engagement: Full Weight (~0.71 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by adding the number of Twitter followers and the number of Facebook “Likes” per capita. - Number of Coaches in Past 10 Seasons (Seasons 2012-13 to 2021-22): Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
- Stadium Capacity: Half Weight (~0.36 Points)
Note: This metric was calculated by dividing stadium capacity by city population.
Sources: Data used to create this ranking were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, National Collegiate Athletic Association, ESPN, Soccer Stadium Digest, National Soccer Hall of Fame, FlashScore, Google Trends, Sportico, each conference’s website, each team’s website and each team’s social media accounts.
Supporting Video Files: