Head to head

Whose comment section wins?

Pick any two fanbases and compare what their comment sections say, stat for stat.

SEC
Alabama
Crimson Tide
vs
ACC
Clemson
Tigers
BAMA sentiment · 141,238 comments
Positive54.8%
Neutral7%
Negative36.5%
Mixed1.6%
CLEM sentiment · 38,829 comments
Positive48.9%
Neutral7.5%
Negative41.8%
Mixed1.8%
Mood

Who is happier

Fan Score counts positive comments per 1,000, so a loud fanbase cannot buy its way up the board. Positive share tells the same story as a percentage of everything said.

Alabama
Clemson

Fan Score

548.3 (better)
488.9

Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)

Positive share

54.8% (better)
48.9%

Share of all comments that are positive

Edge

Who is harsher

Negativity, toxicity and explicit language, every one of them per 1,000 comments so the two sides stay comparable whatever their volume.

Alabama
Clemson

Negativity

365.5 (better)
418.1

Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Toxicity

33.2 (better)
48

Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 (lower wins)

Explicit language

16 (better)
32.5

Explicit-language comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Identity-based abuse, tag by tag

Tag applications per 1,000 comments

0.6Race0.3
1.7Gender2.1
0.7Age1.1

Alabama left, Clemson right. Tag applications per 1,000 comments, on the same scale across every row. Reported as rates only: this block never picks a winner.

Subject matter

What they talk about

Three topic groups where neither direction is better, just louder. These rows describe a comment section instead of scoring it.

Alabama
Clemson

Betting talk

3
2.4

Sports-betting comments per 1,000

Team & front office talk

114
119.3

Team and front-office comments per 1,000: coaching, the athletic department, and gameday

NIL & portal talk

4.2
9.7

NIL and Transfer Portal tag applications per 1,000, which may overlap

Shape of the season

Week by week, side by side

The same season read twice: weekly mood for both comment sections, the weeks the two teams actually met, and where each fanbase lands nationally on the seven topic groups.

Rivalry pulse

Weekly comment shares: Alabama up, Clemson down
Alabama positive ↑Clemson positive ↓Negative shareHover a W or L for that week’s result
Alabama had the happier comment section in 14 of 22 shared weeks, Clemson in 8.
Weekly positive and negative comment shares for Alabama and Clemson
Week ofAlabama resultAlabama positive shareAlabama negative shareClemson resultClemson positive shareClemson negative share
2025-08-2380.3%12.6%76.5%10.9%
2025-08-30L26%65.2%L29.6%61.3%
2025-09-06W38.5%51.3%W28.8%61.3%
2025-09-13W69%21%L24.3%65.8%
2025-09-2074.3%14.3%L20.2%71.1%
2025-09-27W74.3%16.8%56.9%36.6%
2025-10-04W80.3%13.5%W65%26.3%
2025-10-11W66.8%25.5%W59.3%30.7%
2025-10-18W80%12.5%L30.3%58.7%
2025-10-25W61%28.4%44.1%32.1%
2025-11-0171.3%14.6%L24.9%65.1%
2025-11-08W74.4%18.5%W W64.4%27.2%
2025-11-15L39.9%50.8%64.1%29.1%
2025-11-22W66.1%26.5%W70.3%19.8%
2025-11-29W65.1%27.3%W64.6%27.3%
2025-12-06L39.7%51.1%43.9%38.1%
2025-12-13W74.7%18.5%59.5%28.5%
2025-12-2062.6%30.1%82.7%9.9%
2025-12-27L37.6%54.3%L40.4%50.8%
2026-01-0351.4%34.4%55.4%34.1%
2026-01-1074.4%18.2%53.4%31.9%
2026-01-1741.2%39.4%52.4%35.7%

Fingerprint duel

Each fanbase's national percentile on the seven comment-topic groups, overlaid.

AlabamaClemson
Harm · CLEM +28 ptsIdentity-Based Abuse · CLEM +11 ptsExplicit Language · CLEM +31 ptsCollege Sports · CLEM +29 ptsOff-Field Storylines · CLEM +61 ptsSports Betting · BAMA +24 ptsTeam & Front Office · CLEM +7 pts
Each axis is the team's percentile among ranked FBS teams for that tag group; deltas are gaps in percentile points. Low-volume fanbases are excluded from each cohort.
  • Alabama Harm: 51st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Alabama Identity-Based Abuse: 46th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Alabama Explicit Language: 43rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Alabama College Sports: 4th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Alabama Off-Field Storylines: 23rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Alabama Sports Betting: 49th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Alabama Team & Front Office: 36th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Clemson Harm: 79th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Clemson Identity-Based Abuse: 57th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Clemson Explicit Language: 74th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Clemson College Sports: 33rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Clemson Off-Field Storylines: 84th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Clemson Sports Betting: 25th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Clemson Team & Front Office: 43rd percentile of ranked FBS teams

The season, felt twice

Weekly positive share for both comment sections on one axis; hover shows the week's combined comment volume. Alabama's positive share was higher in 14 of 22 shared weeks, Clemson's in 8.

BAMACLEM
0%41%83%Aug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: BAMA, CLEM
Week ofBAMACLEMComments
2025-08-2380.3%76.5%1,737
2025-08-3026%29.6%15,389
2025-09-0638.5%28.8%14,468
2025-09-1369%24.3%6,481
2025-09-2074.3%20.2%4,281
2025-09-2774.3%56.9%7,130
2025-10-0480.3%65%8,951
2025-10-1166.8%59.3%6,175
2025-10-1880%30.3%6,026
2025-10-2561%44.1%6,584
2025-11-0171.3%24.9%4,086
2025-11-0874.4%64.4%9,979
2025-11-1539.9%64.1%12,271
2025-11-2266.1%70.3%8,798
2025-11-2965.1%64.6%14,644
2025-12-0639.7%43.9%16,518
2025-12-1374.7%59.5%4,302
2025-12-2062.6%82.7%12,057
2025-12-2737.6%40.4%17,212
2026-01-0351.4%55.4%1,618
2026-01-1074.4%53.4%767
2026-01-1741.2%52.4%593
Behind the numbers

Sence read 2,498,712 college-football comments to build this site. It can read yours.