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 this year they took home a bronze medal at the Tokyo Olympics.
Unfortunately, despite soccer’s growing popularity, its attendance took a hit during the COVID-19 pandemic, as was the case with all major sports. This year, more people should be able to show support for their favorite teams in person, and some teams are requiring proof of vaccination or a negative COVID-19 test for fans to enter the stadium.
As soccer recovers from the pandemic, it’s ideal for fans to be in one of the best cities for the sport. 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.
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 | 54.86 | 1 | 13 | 27 | 9 | 111 |
| 2 | Seattle, WA | 48.29 | 2 | 6 | 32 | 63 | 165 |
| 3 | Salt Lake City, UT | 47.91 | 5 | 3 | 7 | 170 | 98 |
| 4 | Portland, OR | 45.12 | 9 | 1 | 32 | 145 | 120 |
| 5 | Orlando, FL | 41.59 | 8 | 5 | 32 | 69 | 81 |
| 6 | Kansas City, MO | 39.94 | 3 | 13 | 32 | 152 | 171 |
| 7 | Atlanta, GA | 39.81 | 4 | 13 | 30 | 39 | 130 |
| 8 | Washington, DC | 39.46 | 6 | 9 | 32 | 11 | 10 |
| 9 | New York, NY | 38.83 | 7 | 11 | 18 | 5 | 12 |
| 10 | Cary, NC | 32.71 | 24 | 2 | 32 | 170 | 288 |
| 11 | Miami, FL | 31.93 | 15 | 13 | 6 | 106 | 219 |
| 12 | Houston, TX | 31.18 | 14 | 10 | 32 | 76 | 79 |
| 13 | Columbus, OH | 29.7 | 10 | 13 | 32 | 90 | 67 |
| 14 | Chicago, IL | 29.14 | 21 | 7 | 32 | 35 | 65 |
| 15 | Louisville, KY | 29.02 | 24 | 8 | 1 | 82 | 135 |
| 16 | Cincinnati, OH | 28.96 | 11 | 13 | 32 | 107 | 90 |
| 17 | Nashville, TN | 28.84 | 13 | 13 | 32 | 99 | 38 |
| 18 | St. Paul, MN | 28.25 | 12 | 13 | 32 | 57 | 112 |
| 19 | Kansas City, KS | 28.01 | 24 | 4 | 20 | 170 | 288 |
| 20 | Philadelphia, PA | 27.63 | 19 | 13 | 32 | 7 | 8 |
| 21 | Boston, MA | 27.24 | 18 | 13 | 32 | 18 | 14 |
| 22 | San Jose, CA | 25.99 | 16 | 13 | 32 | 160 | 240 |
| 23 | Denver, CO | 25.66 | 17 | 13 | 32 | 118 | 156 |
| 24 | Dallas, TX | 24.11 | 20 | 13 | 32 | 28 | 74 |
| 25 | Austin, TX | 21.44 | 22 | 13 | 23 | 170 | 142 |
| 26 | Charleston, SC | 18.5 | 24 | 13 | 3 | 137 | 43 |
| 27 | Hartford, CT | 17.53 | 24 | 13 | 5 | 111 | 77 |
| 28 | San Diego, CA | 17.08 | 24 | 13 | 15 | 31 | 32 |
| 29 | Pittsburgh, PA | 16.95 | 24 | 13 | 12 | 41 | 60 |
| 30 | Sacramento, CA | 16.65 | 24 | 13 | 2 | 159 | 236 |
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.
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 (54.86) | 1 | Salt Lake City, UT (47.91) | 1 | Edinburg, TX (15.20) |
| 2 | Seattle, WA (48.29) | 2 | Orlando, FL (41.59) | 2 | Charlottesville, VA (12.07) |
| 3 | Portland, OR (45.12) | 3 | Cary, NC (32.71) | 3 | Clemson, SC (11.75) |
| 4 | Kansas City, MO (39.94) | 4 | Kansas City, KS (28.01) | 4 | Leesburg, VA (11.68) |
| 5 | Atlanta, GA (39.81) | 5 | Charleston, SC (18.50) | 5 | Buies Creek, NC (11.54) |
| 6 | Washington, DC (39.46) | 6 | Hartford, CT (17.53) | 6 | Chapel Hill, NC (10.48) |
| 7 | New York, NY (38.83) | 7 | Irvine, CA (15.21) | 7 | State College, PA (10.31) |
| 8 | Miami, FL (31.93) | 8 | Birmingham, AL (15.10) | 8 | Stanford, CA (9.69) |
| 9 | Houston, TX (31.18) | 9 | St. Petersburg, FL (13.44) | 9 | West Point, NY (9.18) |
| 10 | Columbus, OH (29.70) | 10 | Tacoma, WA (8.67) | 10 | Bloomington, IN (9.02) |
| 11 | Chicago, IL (29.14) | 11 | Dayton, OH (7.84) | 11 | Lewisburg, PA (8.99) |
| 12 | Louisville, KY (29.02) | 12 | Greensboro, NC (7.83) | 12 | Kingston, RI (8.68) |
| 13 | Cincinnati, OH (28.96) | 13 | Columbia, SC (7.25) | 13 | Boiling Springs, NC (8.68) |
| 14 | Nashville, TN (28.84) | 14 | Des Moines, IA (7.18) | 14 | Storrs, CT (8.53) |
| 15 | St. Paul, MN (28.25) | 15 | South Bend, IN (7.16) | 15 | Princeton, NJ (8.49) |
| 16 | Philadelphia, PA (27.63) | 16 | Cambridge, MA (7.15) | 16 | College Park, MD (8.44) |
| 17 | Boston, MA (27.24) | 17 | Wilmington, NC (6.79) | 17 | Conway, SC (8.26) |
| 18 | San Jose, CA (25.99) | 18 | Lowell, MA (6.57) | 18 | Annapolis, MD (8.12) |
| 19 | Denver, CO (25.66) | 19 | Richmond, VA (6.48) | 19 | New Brunswick, NJ (8.04) |
| 20 | Dallas, TX (24.11) | 20 | Winston-Salem, NC (6.33) | 20 | Greenville, SC (7.90) |
| 21 | Austin, TX (21.44) | 21 | High Point, NC (6.32) | 21 | Fairfield, CT (7.89) |
| 22 | San Diego, CA (17.08) | 22 | Fort Wayne, IN (6.08) | 22 | Hamilton, NY (7.86) |
| 23 | Pittsburgh, PA (16.95) | 23 | Santa Clara, CA (5.92) | 23 | Harrisonburg, VA (7.63) |
| 24 | Sacramento, CA (16.65) | 24 | Green Bay, WI (5.80) | 24 | Allegany, NY (7.57) |
| 25 | Indianapolis, IN (16.25) | 25 | Providence, RI (5.66) | 25 | Hamden, CT (7.51) |
| 26 | Memphis, TN (15.29) | 26 | Spokane, WA (5.59) | 26 | Amherst, MA (7.49) |
| 27 | Las Vegas, NV (14.76) | 27 | Buffalo, NY (5.51) | 27 | Lawrence, NJ (7.43) |
| 28 | Tulsa, OK (14.15) | 28 | Durham, NC (5.48) | 28 | Bethlehem, PA (7.42) |
| 29 | Phoenix, AZ (13.96) | 29 | Fullerton, CA (5.27) | 29 | Morgantown, WV (7.42) |
| 30 | Charlotte, NC (13.89) | 30 | Akron, OH (5.08) | 30 | DeKalb, IL (7.41) |
| 31 | Albuquerque, NM (13.76) | 31 | Berkeley, CA (5.05) | 31 | Bowling Green, OH (7.39) |
| 32 | Minneapolis, MN (12.84) | 32 | Madison, WI (4.77) | 32 | New Britain, CT (7.27) |
| 33 | San Antonio, TX (12.83) | 33 | Gainesville, FL (4.74) | 33 | Fairfax, VA (7.26) |
| 34 | El Paso, TX (11.87) | 34 | Springfield, MO (4.73) | 34 | Easton, PA (7.24) |
| 35 | Colorado Springs, CO (11.71) | 35 | Ann Arbor, MI (4.57) | 35 | Conway, AR (7.20) |
| 36 | Oklahoma City, OK (9.21) | 36 | Macon-Bibb County, GA (4.38) | 36 | Hackensack, NJ (7.18) |
| 37 | Baltimore, MD (7.37) | 37 | Knoxville, TN (4.28) | 37 | Smithfield, RI (7.17) |
| 38 | Riverside, CA (7.33) | 38 | New Haven, CT (4.20) | 38 | Radford, VA (7.13) |
| 39 | St. Louis, MO (7.07) | 39 | Norfolk, VA (4.07) | 39 | Spartanburg, SC (7.12) |
| 40 | Milwaukee, WI (7.05) | 40 | Abilene, TX (4.06) | 40 | Farmville, VA (7.10) |
| 41 | Tampa, FL (6.83) | 41 | Mobile, AL (3.97) | 41 | Lynchburg, VA (7.09) |
| 42 | Cleveland, OH (6.53) | 42 | Greeley, CO (3.94) | 42 | Kalamazoo, MI (6.93) |
| 43 | Detroit, MI (6.42) | 43 | College Station, TX (3.79) | 43 | West Long Branch, NJ (6.86) |
| 44 | Stockton, CA (6.34) | 44 | Baton Rouge, LA (3.67) | 44 | Fort Myers, FL (6.84) |
| 45 | Jacksonville, FL (5.69) | 45 | Provo, UT (3.57) | 45 | Williamsburg, VA (6.53) |
| 46 | Lexington-Fayette, KY (5.67) | 46 | Syracuse, NY (3.55) | 46 | Emmitsburg, MD (6.47) |
| 47 | Oakland, CA (5.50) | 47 | Chattanooga, TN (3.55) | 47 | Hanover, NH (6.41) |
| 48 | Omaha, NE (5.48) | 48 | Clarksville, TN (3.51) | 48 | Loretto, PA (6.16) |
| 49 | Raleigh, NC (5.23) | 49 | Athens, GA (3.49) | 49 | Binghamton, NY (6.10) |
| 50 | San Francisco, CA (4.19) | 50 | Denton, TX (3.44) | 50 | San Luis Obispo, CA (6.09) |
| 51 | Bakersfield, CA (4.18) | 51 | Tallahassee, FL (3.39) | 51 | Durham, NH (6.07) |
| 52 | Honolulu, HI (3.72) | 52 | Peoria, IL (3.36) | 52 | Highland Heights, KY (6.05) |
| 53 | Tucson, AZ (2.91) | 53 | Newark, NJ (3.32) | 53 | Hempstead, NY (5.88) |
| 54 | Long Beach, CA (2.57) | 54 | Waco, TX (3.31) | 54 | Orem, UT (5.85) |
| 55 | Fort Worth, TX (2.35) | 55 | Boulder, CO (3.29) | 55 | Lewiston, NY (5.83) |
| 56 | Fresno, CA (1.96) | 56 | Beaumont, TX (3.28) | 56 | Stony Brook, NY (5.78) |
| 57 | Corpus Christi, TX (1.65) | 57 | Evansville, IN (3.14) | 57 | Santa Barbara, CA (5.76) |
| Info | 58 | Lincoln, NE (3.12) | 58 | Rock Hill, SC (5.73) | |
| Info | 59 | Lubbock, TX (3.02) | 59 | Moraga, CA (5.53) | |
| Info | 60 | Worcester, MA (2.87) | 60 | Huntington, WV (5.32) | |
| Info | 61 | Jersey City, NJ (2.73) | 61 | Corvallis, OR (5.25) | |
| Info | 62 | Tempe, AZ (2.46) | 62 | East Lansing, MI (5.18) | |
| Info | 63 | Boise, ID (2.42) | 63 | Davidson, NC (5.10) | |
| Info | 64 | Norman, OK (2.28) | 64 | Albany, NY (5.10) | |
| Info | Info | 65 | Columbia, MO (2.15) | 65 | Elon, NC (4.99) |
| Info | Info | 66 | Murfreesboro, TN (2.13) | 66 | Oxford, MS (4.97) |
| Info | Info | 67 | Montgomery, AL (1.96) | 67 | Statesboro, GA (4.94) |
| Info | Info | 68 | Fort Collins, CO (1.95) | 68 | Evanston, IL (4.64) |
| Info | Info | 69 | Toledo, OH (1.92) | 69 | Auburn, AL (4.58) |
| Info | Info | 70 | Fargo, ND (1.81) | 70 | Blacksburg, VA (4.57) |
| Info | Info | 71 | Huntsville, AL (1.75) | 71 | Kent, OH (4.57) |
| Info | Info | 72 | Eugene, OR (1.73) | 72 | Charleston, IL (4.36) |
| Info | Info | 73 | Little Rock, AR (1.63) | 73 | Edwardsville, IL (4.35) |
| Info | Info | 74 | Reno, NV (1.62) | 74 | Martin, TN (4.34) |
| Info | Info | 75 | Las Cruces, NM (1.35) | 75 | Asheville, NC (4.28) |
| Info | Info | 76 | Jackson, MS (1.14) | 76 | Burlington, VT (4.28) |
| Info | Info | 77 | Lafayette, LA (0.90) | 77 | Muncie, IN (4.24) |
| Info | Info | 78 | Hampton, VA (0.88) | 78 | Clinton, SC (4.23) |
| Info | Info | Info | 79 | Rochester, MI (4.13) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 80 | Iowa City, IA (4.11) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 81 | Nacogdoches, TX (4.08) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 82 | Normal, IL (4.07) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 83 | Athens, OH (4.06) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 84 | North Andover, MA (4.05) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 85 | Kennesaw, GA (4.01) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 86 | Champaign, IL (4.01) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 87 | West Lafayette, IN (3.99) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 88 | Poughkeepsie, NY (3.98) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 89 | Ypsilanti, MI (3.98) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 90 | Valparaiso, IN (3.90) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 91 | Starkville, MS (3.87) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 92 | Fayetteville, AR (3.87) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 93 | Davis, CA (3.83) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 94 | Logan, UT (3.81) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 95 | Mount Pleasant, MI (3.80) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 96 | Stillwater, OK (3.78) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 97 | Huntsville, TX (3.75) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 98 | Cookeville, TN (3.70) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 99 | Boca Raton, FL (3.69) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 100 | Newark, DE (3.68) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 101 | Orangeburg, SC (3.66) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 102 | Hammond, LA (3.61) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 103 | Brookings, SD (3.58) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 104 | Johnson City, TN (3.50) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 105 | Macomb, IL (3.50) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 106 | Malibu, CA (3.44) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 107 | Ames, IA (3.41) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 108 | Ithaca, NY (3.38) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 109 | Thibodaux, LA (3.33) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 110 | Prairie View, TX (3.18) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 111 | Lawrence, KS (3.17) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 112 | South Orange Village, NJ (3.13) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 113 | Morehead, KY (3.09) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 114 | Lake Charles, LA (3.06) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 115 | Cape Girardeau, MO (2.96) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 116 | DeLand, FL (2.91) | |
| Info | Info | Info | 117 | Cullowhee, NC | |
| Info | Info | Info | 118 | Laramie, WY | |
| Info | Info | Info | 119 | Greenville, NC | |
| Info | Info | Info | 120 | Pullman, WA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 120 | New Rochelle, NY | |
| Info | Info | Info | 122 | Lexington, VA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 123 | Flagstaff, AZ | |
| Info | Info | Info | 124 | Ruston, LA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 125 | Manhattan, KS | |
| Info | Info | Info | 126 | Ogden, UT | |
| Info | Info | Info | 127 | Murray, KY | |
| Info | Info | Info | 128 | Vermillion, SD | |
| Info | Info | Info | 129 | San Marcos, TX | |
| Info | Info | Info | 130 | Tuscaloosa, AL | |
| Info | Info | Info | 131 | Cheney, WA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 132 | Orono, ME | |
| Info | Info | Info | 133 | Itta Bena, MS | |
| Info | Info | Info | 134 | Boone, NC | |
| Info | Info | Info | 135 | Carbondale, IL | |
| Info | Info | Info | 136 | Grambling, LA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 137 | Bowling Green, KY | |
| Info | Info | Info | 138 | Hattiesburg, MS | |
| Info | Info | Info | 139 | Natchitoches, LA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 140 | Missoula, MT | |
| Info | Info | Info | 141 | Troy, AL | |
| Info | Info | Info | 142 | Jonesboro, AR | |
| Info | Info | Info | 143 | Moscow, ID | |
| Info | Info | Info | 144 | Cedar Falls, IA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 145 | Florence, AL | |
| Info | Info | Info | 146 | Fayette, MS | |
| Info | Info | Info | 147 | Jacksonville, AL | |
| Info | Info | Info | 148 | Terre Haute, IN | |
| Info | Info | Info | 149 | Grand Forks, ND | |
| Info | Info | Info | 150 | Coral Gables, FL | |
| Info | Info | Info | 151 | Oxford, OH | |
| Info | Info | Info | 152 | Cedar City, UT | |
| Info | Info | Info | 153 | Pocatello, ID | |
| Info | Info | Info | 154 | Towson, MD | |
| Info | Info | Info | 155 | St. George, UT | |
| Info | Info | Info | 156 | Richmond, KY | |
| Info | Info | Info | 157 | Youngstown, OH | |
| Info | Info | Info | 158 | Dover, DE | |
| Info | Info | Info | 159 | Monroe, LA | |
| Info | Info | Info | 160 | Pine Bluff, AR |
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.?
- How has the pandemic impacted the soccer industry?
- 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 him or her to pursue the MLS/NWSL or a premier international league?
- The U.S. Women’s soccer team previously negotiated higher pay and will now receive some of the same travel “perks” as their male counterparts. Do you think other sports should follow this example to increase pay equity between male and female athletes?
Ask the Experts
Kyriaki (Kiki) Kaplanidou
Ph.D. – Professor, Director of the Graduate Sport Event Management Certificate, Department of Sport Management, College of Health and Human Performance – University of Florida
Read More
Ph.D. – Professor, Director of the Graduate Sport Event Management Certificate, Department of Sport Management, College of Health and Human Performance – University of Florida
Read More
Kevin Ayers
Professor, Department of Health and Human Performance, College of Education & Human Development – Radford University
Read More
Professor, Department of Health and Human Performance, College of Education & Human Development – Radford University
Read More
Mark Conrad
Associate Professor, Law and Ethics; Director, Sports Business Concentration, Gabelli School of Business – Fordham University
Read More
Associate Professor, Law and Ethics; Director, Sports Business Concentration, Gabelli School of Business – Fordham University
Read More
Kwame Agyemang
Ph.D. – Associate Professor; Editor-in-Chief, Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal; Department of Human Sciences, College of Education and Human Ecology – Ohio State University
Read More
Ph.D. – Associate Professor; Editor-in-Chief, Sport, Business and Management: An International Journal; Department of Human Sciences, College of Education and Human Ecology – Ohio State University
Read More
Jonathan Bruning
Associate Professor, Communication and Digital Media – Carthage College
Read More
Associate Professor, Communication and Digital Media – Carthage College
Read More
Jennifer Hoffman
Associate Professor, Educational Foundations, Leadership & Policy, College of Education – University of Washington
Read More
Associate Professor, Educational Foundations, Leadership & Policy, College of Education – University of Washington
Read More
More Experts
Methodology
In order to determine the best cities for soccer fans, WalletHub compared 295 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
Due to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the schedules for the 2019-2020 season, for some metrics we considered the values up to the 2018-2019 season. This helps to ensure a level comparison field among the teams.
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 2011-12 to 2020-21): 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 stadium 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 2011-12 to 2020-21): 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 stadium 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 2011-12 to 2020-21): 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 stadium 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 2011-12 to 2020-21): 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 2011-12 to 2020-21): 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: