Whose comment section wins?
Pick any two fanbases and compare what their comment sections say, stat for stat.
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.
Fan Score
Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)
Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)
Positive share
Share of all comments that are positive
Share of all comments that are positive
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.
Negativity
Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)
Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)
Toxicity
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 (lower wins)
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 (lower wins)
Explicit language
Explicit-language comments per 1,000 (lower wins)
Explicit-language comments per 1,000 (lower wins)
Identity-based abuse, tag by tag
Tag applications per 1,000 comments
Auburn left, Missouri right. Tag applications per 1,000 comments, on the same scale across every row. Reported as rates only: this block never picks a winner.
What they talk about
Three topic groups where neither direction is better, just louder. These rows describe a comment section instead of scoring it.
Betting talk
Sports-betting comments per 1,000
Sports-betting comments per 1,000
Team & front office talk
Team and front-office comments per 1,000: coaching, the athletic department, and gameday
Team and front-office comments per 1,000: coaching, the athletic department, and gameday
NIL & portal talk
NIL and Transfer Portal tag applications per 1,000, which may overlap
NIL and Transfer Portal tag applications per 1,000, which may overlap
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
| Week of | Auburn result | Auburn positive share | Auburn negative share | Missouri result | Missouri positive share | Missouri negative share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-23 | W | 72.7% | 14% | W | 62.9% | 19.7% |
| 2025-08-30 | – | 73.4% | 16.8% | – | 65.5% | 15.4% |
| 2025-09-06 | W | 74.4% | 15.5% | W | 78.4% | 12.8% |
| 2025-09-13 | W | 72.1% | 18.3% | W | 63.7% | 13.8% |
| 2025-09-20 | L | 44.9% | 44.8% | W | 66% | 17.4% |
| 2025-09-27 | L | 27.8% | 63.1% | W | 58.9% | 27.9% |
| 2025-10-04 | – | 51.8% | 34.6% | – | 68.4% | 9.5% |
| 2025-10-11 | L | 36.2% | 54.2% | L | 42.3% | 47% |
| 2025-10-18 | L | 32.8% | 56.5% | W | 59.5% | 29% |
| 2025-10-25 | W | 65.7% | 27% | L | 43.1% | 43.4% |
| 2025-11-01 | L | 31.8% | 55.8% | – | 59.9% | 20.4% |
| 2025-11-08 | L | 66.3% | 25.5% | L | 40.6% | 43.2% |
| 2025-11-15 | – | 61.4% | 21.8% | W | 67.3% | 19.6% |
| 2025-11-22 | W | 72.7% | 16.3% | L | 37.6% | 50.6% |
| 2025-11-29 | L | 50.9% | 37.2% | W | 56.7% | 32.9% |
| 2025-12-06 | – | 61.7% | 24.8% | – | 53.3% | 28.3% |
| 2025-12-13 | – | 61.6% | 27.4% | – | 62.3% | 21.4% |
| 2025-12-20 | – | 62.4% | 26.7% | – | 64.7% | 22% |
| 2025-12-27 | – | 63.4% | 24.9% | L | 36.6% | 51.5% |
| 2026-01-03 | – | 70.4% | 16.4% | – | 67% | 18.9% |
| 2026-01-10 | – | 68.5% | 16.2% | – | 60.9% | 15.9% |
| 2026-01-17 | – | 52.1% | 33.2% | – | 63.7% | 26.5% |
“Can we PLEASE bring our own refrees????”
“Tonya,well, not anymore, it's not about supporting those young men when tbey started getting paid millions. What happens when you get support at work but fail to produce?”
“The coach of the year would not have their quarterback run on a key third and three who didn’t make it ,when you have the nations leading rusher in your backfield”
“Please run him until he doesn't want to run anymore. He's a wild horse so why put him in a stable. Come on Coach. MIZ congratulations Young Bull”
Fingerprint duel
Each fanbase's national percentile on the seven comment-topic groups, overlaid.
- Auburn Harm: 54th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Auburn Identity-Based Abuse: 49th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Auburn Explicit Language: 16th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Auburn College Sports: 54th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Auburn Off-Field Storylines: 93rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Auburn Sports Betting: 25th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Auburn Team & Front Office: 87th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Missouri Harm: 45th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Missouri Identity-Based Abuse: 16th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Missouri Explicit Language: 7th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Missouri College Sports: 74th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Missouri Off-Field Storylines: 92nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Missouri Sports Betting: 40th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Missouri Team & Front Office: 48th 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. Auburn's positive share was higher in 10 of 22 shared weeks, Missouri's in 12.
| Week of | AUB | MIZ | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-23 | 72.7% | 62.9% | 1,541 |
| 2025-08-30 | 73.4% | 65.5% | 2,896 |
| 2025-09-06 | 74.4% | 78.4% | 3,084 |
| 2025-09-13 | 72.1% | 63.7% | 2,689 |
| 2025-09-20 | 44.9% | 66% | 3,918 |
| 2025-09-27 | 27.8% | 58.9% | 3,874 |
| 2025-10-04 | 51.8% | 68.4% | 1,782 |
| 2025-10-11 | 36.2% | 42.3% | 4,948 |
| 2025-10-18 | 32.8% | 59.5% | 3,711 |
| 2025-10-25 | 65.7% | 43.1% | 3,711 |
| 2025-11-01 | 31.8% | 59.9% | 2,817 |
| 2025-11-08 | 66.3% | 40.6% | 4,862 |
| 2025-11-15 | 61.4% | 67.3% | 1,741 |
| 2025-11-22 | 72.7% | 37.6% | 7,745 |
| 2025-11-29 | 50.9% | 56.7% | 14,721 |
| 2025-12-06 | 61.7% | 53.3% | 3,126 |
| 2025-12-13 | 61.6% | 62.3% | 1,212 |
| 2025-12-20 | 62.4% | 64.7% | 779 |
| 2025-12-27 | 63.4% | 36.6% | 1,604 |
| 2026-01-03 | 70.4% | 67% | 2,282 |
| 2026-01-10 | 68.5% | 60.9% | 1,063 |
| 2026-01-17 | 52.1% | 63.7% | 651 |