Football runs Tennessee. So I ran every test we built for it against the soccer data too — money, size, private schools, raw talent — to see whether being good at one says anything about the other. Mostly, it doesn't. What carries over isn't skill. It's affluence.
The whole site started as a soccer project. The football reports — the dynasties, the modern game, the affluence test, the NFL pipeline — exist to set up one comparison: run the same measurements on both sports and watch them answer differently. Here is that comparison, in four tests.
A school's soccer strength tracks its wealth at r = +0.38. Its football strength tracks it far more weakly — r = +0.24 — and where its NFL talent comes from doesn't track wealth at all (r = +0.09, not significant). Money buys soccer results far more reliably than football ones. That is the engine behind the affluence report, and the first reason the two sports diverge.
You might expect more upsets in soccer, where one hot keeper can steal a game. The opposite is true. One class apart, the smaller school wins 47.3% of the time in football but only 39.1% in soccer — the soccer scoreboard is the more size-determined of the two. Football only becomes deterministic at the extremes: stretch the gap to four classes and the upset rate collapses to 10.0%. The Who-Beats-Whom explorer lets you walk the full football ladder.
Both sports tilt toward private schools, football even harder. Division-II privates beat public schools 67.6% of the time in football; in soccer, private schools win 59.9% of private-vs-public matches. Two sports, the same thumb on the scale — the financial-aid line the Brentwood Academy cases drew around football turns out to shape soccer too.
Does producing pro football talent mean a school is any good at soccer? Only if it is also a wealthy private. The NFL factories that also field strong soccer are the academies — MBA, Baylor, Brentwood Academy — while public pipelines like Melrose and Hamilton barely register in soccer at all. Talent in one sport doesn't transfer; affluence does.
Barely — and only through money. A school that wins at football tells you almost nothing about whether it wins at soccer, unless it happens to be a wealthy private, in which case it tends to win at both. Tennessee built its sports structure around football — the public/private split, the recruiting fights, the financial-aid line — for the one game where money is the weakest predictor of who wins. Then it applied that same structure to soccer, the sport where money predicts the most. The affluence report is where that mismatch finally shows up as a Bearden.