Study: Pittsburgh the best U.S. city for football fans, State College 4th among ‘small’ cities

Irwin20

Well-known member
From the article: It’s Super Bowl week. And as the unofficial national holiday of game day approaches, so do the lists celebrating America’s favorite sport.

And, at least according to a popular personal finance website, in no U.S. city is it better to be a football fan than Pittsburgh.

Buoyed by an NFL record-tying six Super Bowl championships by the hometown Steelers, Pittsburgh finished first among 245 cities evaluated by wallethub.com. Ranking each city with a pro and/or college team in 21 metrics ranging from team performance, average ticket price and stadium accessibility, WalletHub gave Pittsburgh an aggregate “score” of 62.61, well ahead of runner-up Dallas.

Boston, Green Bay and New York City rounded out the top five in the overall rankings.


Broken down by city size, Pittsburgh was the best of the “large” cities, with Green Bay tops among those designated as “midsize” and Tuscaloosa, Ala., No. 1 in “small” cities.

State College was fourth among small cities, ranking behind Clemson, S.C., and Fayette, Miss., and just ahead of West Point, N.Y.

Miami was No. 5 in the large city category, with Buffalo, Glendale, Ariz., Fargo, N.D., and Baton Rouge, La., Nos. 2-5 in the midsize rankings.

Among the superlatives for Pittsburgh are tied for first with Green Bay for “most engaged NFL fans,” No. 4 for “most accessible NFL stadium” and seventh for performance level of NFL team.

The home, of course, of Penn State, State College’s highest mark came for most engaged college fans (tied for first with Clemson).

Morgantown, W.Va., placed 54th overall and 18th among small cities. Youngstown was 72nd overall and 31st among small cities.
 

Omar

Well-known member
From the article: It’s Super Bowl week. And as the unofficial national holiday of game day approaches, so do the lists celebrating America’s favorite sport.

And, at least according to a popular personal finance website, in no U.S. city is it better to be a football fan than Pittsburgh.

Buoyed by an NFL record-tying six Super Bowl championships by the hometown Steelers, Pittsburgh finished first among 245 cities evaluated by wallethub.com. Ranking each city with a pro and/or college team in 21 metrics ranging from team performance, average ticket price and stadium accessibility, WalletHub gave Pittsburgh an aggregate “score” of 62.61, well ahead of runner-up Dallas.

Boston, Green Bay and New York City rounded out the top five in the overall rankings.


Broken down by city size, Pittsburgh was the best of the “large” cities, with Green Bay tops among those designated as “midsize” and Tuscaloosa, Ala., No. 1 in “small” cities.

State College was fourth among small cities, ranking behind Clemson, S.C., and Fayette, Miss., and just ahead of West Point, N.Y.

Miami was No. 5 in the large city category, with Buffalo, Glendale, Ariz., Fargo, N.D., and Baton Rouge, La., Nos. 2-5 in the midsize rankings.

Among the superlatives for Pittsburgh are tied for first with Green Bay for “most engaged NFL fans,” No. 4 for “most accessible NFL stadium” and seventh for performance level of NFL team.

The home, of course, of Penn State, State College’s highest mark came for most engaged college fans (tied for first with Clemson).

Morgantown, W.Va., placed 54th overall and 18th among small cities. Youngstown was 72nd overall and 31st among small cities.
Boston? Outside of the Patriots, they have nothing. College and High school football in Boston, sucks. In fact, all football in New England outside of the Pats, sucks. The region isn’t exactly a hot bed for producing football talent.
 

Irwin20

Well-known member
I think they were only looking at NFL and college. HS football not part of this analysis.
 

nupanther

Well-known member
Of course no way to measure these types of things in reality. But this is a debate board. It’s a good football town I’m sure many others are as well.
I didn't read the article but looking at your summary it seems that the list is a ' more bang for your buck` list. Good team, passionate fan base, etc. How much stock did they put in college vs pro teams? Where did Cleveland and Cincinnati fall on the list? And what was the determining factor of large versus mid size? Pittsburgh is 300 K. Buffalo is 295 K. Although Pittsburgh metro is double Buffalo metro
 

Omar

Well-known member
I think they were only looking at NFL and college. HS football not part of this analysis.
Still, Boston College isn’t much to speak of. TBH, Boston has always struck me as more of a Red Sox city than anything else. The Patriots aren’t even technically in Boston.
 

14Red

Well-known member
This "study" does not surprise me at all. The NFL really gathered it's roots in the 60's and 70's, and who were the dominant teams of that time - the Steelers and the Packers. There's one thing we know about fans, about 50% or more are fair weather fans. Meaning they follow winners. Ohio State has a gigantic fan base because they've been successful forever. I've been around long enough to remember when Alabama wasn't great at football. They were with Bear Bryant, then they had the hole in the 80's and 90's until Saban came along.
It's funny how generational NFL fans are. Pay attention, there will be a youthful generation of Kansas City Chief fans like we've never seen before.
Pittsburgh probably tops the list because they have been great for the longest amounts of time over the generations. There was a slight dip in the late 80's / 90's with the Bubby Brister/ Kordell Stewart Steelers, but other than that, they've been .500 or better about every season the last 50 years.
 
.
Top