It was an unexpectedly tumultuous off-season last year for the UFL, wherein Mike Repole was brought on as co-owner, three teams were moved to new cities, others were transferred to new stadiums, uniforms were changed, and more unique rules were introduced. How did fans view those areas of change after the most recent season? We now have some data via our annual UFL News Hub Fan Survey.
What started out as questions meant to take the temperature of XFL fans after the league's return in 2023 has morphed into a yearly exercise for those now following the UFL. This is the fourth year of the survey - some questions are new year-to-year, and some are the same as a way to measure change in those opinions over time. There was also a space for comments, allowing for respondents to expand on some answers or add additional thoughts outside of the questions asked.
Participation was very similar to last year, up just a few from 2025. You can see the results and my analysis for that version here.
1. How would you grade Mike Repole's performance as owner over the last year?
A: 37.6%
B: 46.4%
C: 12.8%
D/F: 3.2%
Analysis: Repole passed with flying colors in his first season as the face of ownership. Last year, only 4.1% of survey-takers gave ownership (before Repole came aboard) an "A" grade. In the four years I've conducted this survey, this is as positive the fanbase has been about the executive team. Notably, Repole has spear-headed expansion efforts that spring football followers have been salivating about for years, putting in place an aggressive plan that would increase the number of UFL franchises to 32 (the same number as the NFL) at some point in the future. Agree or disagree with his process, Repole has a clear vision as to what he believes it will take for spring football to succeed, and that seems to be more than other owners had - or at least had communicated to the public.
2. What is your confidence level that the UFL will still exist five years from now?
Very Confident: 36%
Somewhat Confident: 49.6%
Not Confident At All: 14.4%
Analysis: Between last year's survey and my write-up of the results, Repole was announced as part of the UFL ownership group. At the time, I wrote in my analysis of this same question, "The addition of Mike Repole to the ownership group...has seemed to spark an unusual amount of positivity among UFL fans; had this question been asked prior to Repole's addition, the numbers may have looked more positive." That positivity was seen in the results of question one this year, echoed in question two. While "Somewhat Confident" carried the day for the second year in a row, the percentage dropped slightly from 2025. However, "Very Confident" rose from 11% to 36%; "Not Confident At All" dropped from 38% to 14.4%. Basically, the numbers for those two answer choices inverted. That's a significant shift across one season. The comments left at the end of the survey, while (mostly) constructively critical, reflected this confidence.
3. How would you assess the on-field play during this season of the UFL?
Better than last year: 58.4%
About the same as last year: 36%
Worse than last year: 5.6%
Analysis: Even with the shuffling of rosters and the overhaul of coaching staffs, the on-field product for the UFL continued to improve according to the majority of voters. The "Better than last year" number is up 12 percentage points from 2025 (in comparison to the 2024 season). The increased scoring based in part on rule changes could've played a role in people's minds when answering this question. Another aspect is the quarterback play: While not every team had a Jack Plummer, there seemed to be fewer outright duds at the position than in years' past, and those who did perform poorly were discarded relatively quickly. This is going to be a yearly question to watch as we get into expansion and the thinning of the talent pool because of it - remember, the merger of the XFL and USFL was sold in part as a way to improve the quality of play by going from 16 teams to eight. Expanding to 10 and beyond will nullify that reasoning unless the UFL is able to find a way to at least plateau the quality during that time. Some respondents used the comments to implore the UFL to seek the best players, regardless of age or any other reason that would inhibit the league from signing them. Others said QB play must be improved, and still others hoped the UFL would seek players from European leagues more frequently.
4. Taking into account all aspects of production, which network do you believe had a better presentation of UFL games?
FOX: 52.8%
ABC/ESPN: 20%
No significant difference: 27.2%
Analysis: For the third year in a row, UFL fans prefer FOX's broadcast to the Disney Corp. of ABC and ESPN. In the first year of the UFL, FOX nabbed 46% of the vote. Last year, it was down to 41%. This year, it jumped substantially to nearly 53%. ABC/ESPN declined about five percentage points from 2025's survey. Fans found a more significant difference between the two presentations this year as that number dropped from 33% to 27.2%. These numbers should come as no surprise to anyone who read the responses to Repole's April post on Twitter/X asking fans for the positives and negatives of the league to that point in the season: Fans who chimed in were overwhelmingly negative toward the ABC/ESPN broadcasts.
5. On the whole, how did you feel about the UFL's team rebrands and the introduction of the new teams for 2026 (including new logos, color schemes, uniforms, etc.)?
I liked it: 62.4%
I didn't like it at first, but I was fine with it: 24.8%
I didn't like it: 7.2%
No opinion: 5.6%
Analysis: There seemed to be much consternation online when uniforms were revealed for the new franchises as well as updated threads for the remaining teams. As always, social media can be a haven for negativity when in reality, it may not reflect the feelings of most fans. This is a prime example. For some, they may not have liked the uniforms, but the other branding pieces like new logos and color schemes may have swayed them to the "I liked it" side here. It's also noticeable how many people were initially skeptical but eventually came around - nearly one-quarter of voters. That tends to be the case across all sports for teams getting new looks: There's an outcry of disdain but eventually it just becomes the new normal.
6. What was your favorite rule change for 2026?
No punts inside the 50-yard line: 32%
Four-point field goals beyond 60 yards: 43.2%
Elimination of Tush Push: 1%
One foot in bounds for a catch: 14.4%
Added extra point kick: 9.6%
Other: 0
Analysis: The two rule changes that had arguably the biggest effect on the game were the runaway top vote-getters in this category. The four-point field goal received the plurality of votes and has even been a topic of discussion during the dead zone of the NFL off-season in terms of the potential for future adoption. That's the kind of press Repole no doubt loves. The Tush Push was a change solely to take advantage of the controversy of that play in the NFL, as Repole has readily admitted. While it's a rare play in the UFL, the side effect of the rule - players aren't allowed to push anyone with the ball up the field either - actually did come into play a few times.
7. What was your least favorite rule change for 2026?
No punts inside the 50-yard line: 18.4%
Four-point field goals beyond 60 yards: 4%
Elimination of Tush Push: 25.6%
One foot in bounds for a catch: 14.4%
Added extra point kick: 23.2%
Other: 14.4%
Analysis: I guess it's a good sign when the least favorite rule change is one for a play that rarely if ever happens in spring football. Perhaps it's more a sign that the other rules were just so well-liked, this won by default. It was a close race between the Tush Push and the added extra point kick. We may have had some UFL kickers vote for that one: While some fans long argued for a point-after kick option so that NFL teams could better scout UFL kickers for the next level, 20 extra points were missed in the league in 2026, or two per weekend of games. NFL kickers converted 95.9% of extra points in 2025; UFL kickers sat at just 88.7% in the spring. Fans who voted "other" mostly didn't have a least favorite rule change or had a problem with the league's overtime rules. Which brings us to...
8. How did you feel about the UFL changing the overtime rule after the controversy in the Week Three Orlando vs. Louisville game?
Good - UFL listened to fan feedback and adjusted accordingly: 68.8%
Bad - Should've waited until the off-season to change it: 22.4%
No opinion: 8.8%
Analysis: The advantage of spring football is that the league can and should be more flexible than the behemoth that is the NFL or other, larger, major sports properties. If something comes up that needs changing, especially for rules and bylaws that are uniquely UFL, the league should have the option to act quickly to solve those issues. The question then is, should that apply to ALL in-season issues that arise? Are there some, dealing with the integrity of the game, that should not be as flexible lest it give off the stench of favoritism or not treating all teams equally? These questions are at the crux of the overtime issue that arose early in the 2026 regular season. Fans are not used to having ownership or executive leadership of leagues respond so quickly to a problem as the UFL did here. That's something that earns the trust of fans in terms of knowing the league is listening to their feedback, even if some of those fans may disagree about when the plug should've been pulled on this rule.
9. Of the five potential expansion cities Repole listed as possible on his Pat McAfee Show appearance, which would you prefer to see as the 10th team for 2028?
Austin, Texas: 2.4%
Salt Lake City, Utah: 22.4%
Omaha, Nebraska: 43.2%
Albuquerque, New Mexico: 7.2%
New York City: 24.8%
Analysis: In arguing for expansion locations, one refrain heard often is the need for the league to break into other areas of the country that are not currently served by a team. Right now, the UFL is as much a regional league as it is a national one, with nary a team out west or in the northeast (though Columbus got them closer). Interestingly, while Omaha was the favorite here, putting a team in Nebraska doesn't allow them to cover a wider swath of the United States as much as a Salt Lake City, Albuquerque, or New York City would. For the UFL at this stage, it may be more about finding the right venue partner as much as it is finding the right city to consider covering as many areas of the US as possible. As you'd imagine, expansion was a hot topic in the comments with some folks even hoping the UFL scales up sooner than what is called for in Repole's rather ambitious timeline.
10. How did the emphasis on playing in more intimate soccer-style stadiums affect your enjoyment of watching the games on television?
It made it more enjoyable: 79.2%
It made it less enjoyable: 1.6%
No change: 19.2%
Analysis: The television audience was up for UFL games this year, and the move to the soccer-style stadiums may have played a role in that. Clearly, this was the right move from a TV standpoint and was a hobbyhorse of Repole since he took over as co-owner last year. The jury is out on whether this actually improved the in-person experience as far as getting people to the stadiums - the league says ticket sales were up, though the public numbers say otherwise. The only argument against this tact, one that Vince McMahon may have favored given his stadiums of choice for the XFL in 2020, is that smaller stadiums would not make the league come off as "major league" as playing in big stadiums would. Of course, the swaths of empty seats in the big stadiums wouldn't make spring football feel "major league," either.