Champions League
of Websites
2014/15

Welcome to Champions League of Websites 2014/15

This table complements the study by Departamento de Internet, which is available by clicking on the button.

View table

Champions League of Websites (2014-2015)

We are here again with the 4th updated study of the websites of the participating teams in the UEFA Champions League, 2014-2015 edition. In this year, we have been much more demanding with the criteria, so let’s see…

Study

It is a ranking of the websites of the participating teams in the UEFA Champions League according to the criteria of the Heuristic Evaluation Guide for Websites. This is a guide (checklist) to evaluate objectively the Webs.

Each of the variables analyzed have a relative importance in the final assessment, represented by a specific percentage, taking as reference the 100 as the highest score.

Being as our fourth year, we have seen positive developments in many of the teams. In this website, you can observe the classification of previous years.

Criteria

As we mentioned, we continue with the same criteria as in previous editions. Note that even if the same criteria, we have added a much more rigorous level of assessment.

Objective of the website (9%)

Upon reaching the Web, are clearly identified what are the objectives? Corporate information, official News, tickets, events, competitions...

URL Friendly (5%)

Having a URL friendly, serve to help visitors, both to indicate where you are to remember the URL of that particular section.

User Orientation (9%)

The general structure of the entire Web, both landing page as the Home and its sections, must show in a precise contents and services offered. They would have to be oriented to the uses and needs of visitors.

Look & Feel (8%)

All this is meaningless unless enters the eye. All this has to breathe the same idea, the same character. Certain combinations of colors help to give a serious and professional ... others, just the opposite.

Logo & Slogan (5%)

This variable is shown whether the site's identity in all internal pages, if clearly identifies what is, on who is talking, of authorship, of the services it provides...

Language and Writing (9%)

Use a language for 'humans'? In some cases, we were unable to obtain an English version, so it has been assigned a standard value. It has also been sought in these variable characteristics as concrete and concise language, close, showing that a paragraph is an idea...

Ticketing (8%)

Another new criteria added in the study. It has much to do with the objective of the Website and, given the result, it is surprising how difficult it is sometimes to buy a ticket via the Web. We scored taking into account that we are "experienced users", so we have been very strict in this regard. We have also evaluated aspects of secure platforms, browser compatibility and you do not need to download any plug-ins, etc. .

Memory Overload (4%)

The Memory Overload is a concept that values in the main menu there are not too many terms and / or interfere with the navigation options and understanding of the Web. According to the Guidelines taken as a reference, you should not exceed 7 (+ / - 2) elements, or the 2 or 3 words per element.

Lay-Out (8%)

A good use of the layout of the page when leveraging main informative areas, such as central column. It also examines whether there are spaces too 'visual noise' with blank spaces or too many clean areas. This section also enters the entire page length.

Multimedia (4%)

A good use of these elements, helps clear some variables described above.. We need to seek added value in this use.

Responsive Design (8%)

One of the new criteria has clear relationship in how users navigate the Web. It is therefore completely adapt Web design to fit on any device. Webs is very content, so that at first may seem a difficult criterion to overcome ... Of the 32 teams, only 10 have a customizable design !

Structure and Navigation (15%)

Main criteria in the study. The main questions are: Is the navigation simple and intuitive? Are the links easily visually? Am I an octopus in a garage when I'm on this site? ...

Content in Social Networks (8%)

Finally, we also wanted to assess the use given to the various Social Media channels. If add value to the user, if they are frequently updated , if there is only content ...

Conclusion

We are big fans of Europe TOP 6

Dortmund, Arsenal, Barcelona, Bayern, Atlético de Madrid y Man. City

  • Websites with excellent seaworthiness, correctly oriented target audience easily in ticket a careful look & feel, multiple media items, information and constantly update their profiles in social networks, adaptation in the design ...
  • All of them, over 90 in the overall score and among them we find Past winners (Bayern 2013, Barcelona 2012 and Manchester City 2011).
In the middle

Real Madrid, PSG, Mónaco, Malmö, Chelsea, Juventus, Porto, Benfica,

  • We could classify these sites as complying with its mandate, with excellent results on many criteria, with an overall score higher than 80, but in one of them fails or is not excellent.
  • Surprisingly, in this group is Malmö, along with other equipment that are much greater potential. Also, Real Madrid is in the line of the TOP 6 in Europe.
For its potential, the Ranking in Unexpected

Basel, Liverpool, Schalke, Shakthar Donetsk, Sporting, Zenit, CSKA, Ajax, Leverkusen, Olympiakos, Anderlech, BATE, Roma, Galatasaray, Athletic, APOEL, Maribor & Ludorogets,

  • In this last group of Europe's elite teams, we find very little websites aimed at their public or present serious difficulties in buying tickets, for example.
  • We have met with some examples that have not changed the Web since 2011, presenting the same mistakes without any adaptation ... sure after reading this study, looking for improvement for next year's edition!

Positive surprises

  • Increase with Responsive Web Design
  • Very positive developments and Real Madrid Dormund
  • Although we have been tighter, the average grade of the study is increased to 72/100
  • "Only" sites below are 5 of the 50 points and 14 above 80

Negative Surprises

  • Buy tickets is very complicated in some cases, Responsive Design not found, not orientated to real users…
  • There is not much difference in our classification in UEFA Ranking
  • Great Historic Teams who do not give importance to your web line with potential