Head to head

Whose comment section wins?

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

Big 12
Baylor
Bears
vs
ACC
SMU
Mustangs
On the field
Baylor won 4845 (2OT) on Sep 6.
The comment sections had their own opinions.
BAY sentiment · 8,814 comments
Positive60.7%
Neutral6.6%
Negative31%
Mixed1.7%
SMU sentiment · 7,390 comments
Positive68.1%
Neutral10.7%
Negative19.9%
Mixed1.3%
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.

Baylor
SMU

Fan Score

606.5
(better)681.5

Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)

Positive share

60.7%
(better)68.1%

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.

Baylor
SMU

Negativity

310.3
(better)198.5

Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Toxicity

18.6 (better)
21.4

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

Explicit language

2.6 (better)
13.3

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

Identity-based abuse, tag by tag

Tag applications per 1,000 comments

0.1Race0.8
1Gender0.7
0.2LGBTQIA+0.1
0.2Age0.3

Baylor left, SMU 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.

Baylor
SMU

Betting talk

1.7
2.8

Sports-betting comments per 1,000

Team & front office talk

154.4
77.1

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

NIL & portal talk

7.7
4.6

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: Baylor up, SMU down
Baylor positive ↑SMU positive ↓Negative shareHover a W or L for that week’s result
BAY 48SMU 45
Baylor had the happier comment section in 11 of 22 shared weeks, SMU in 11. When they met on Sep 6, Baylor won 48–45 (2OT); Baylor’s comments were the more positive that week.
Weekly positive and negative comment shares for Baylor and SMU
Week ofBaylor resultBaylor positive shareBaylor negative shareSMU resultSMU positive shareSMU negative share
2025-08-23L88.9%1.9%75.8%4.6%
2025-08-3042.9%44.8%W69.7%13.4%
2025-09-06W75.7%16.8%L43.3%43.6%
2025-09-13W73.1%15.9%W69.4%18.8%
2025-09-20L47.6%42.8%L44.5%42.6%
2025-09-27W73%21.6%80.5%5.1%
2025-10-04W64.9%25.1%W55.5%29.6%
2025-10-1191.7%6.3%W70.3%17.9%
2025-10-18L37.3%52.3%W80.5%12.7%
2025-10-25L30.8%58.8%L48%37.4%
2025-11-01W83.7%10.5%W76.2%13.2%
2025-11-0876.1%15.8%W84.8%6%
2025-11-15L35.4%53.7%83.9%4%
2025-11-22L40.2%53.2%W84.3%7.4%
2025-11-29L66.2%27.7%L36.3%54.7%
2025-12-0670.8%23.1%67.2%14.9%
2025-12-1367%25%49.5%30.3%
2025-12-2078.8%15.4%87.8%4.1%
2025-12-2754.1%40.5%W79.8%6.4%
2026-01-0350%50%84.4%8.2%
2026-01-1084.4%7.8%71.6%14.2%
2026-01-1777.5%14.2%57.9%5.6%
Reactions from that night · Sep 6
Baylor

🫡 Couldn’t have chosen a better voice. #Back2Back

positiveBroadcast & MediaFacebook

Does anyone know what side is Baylor going to be on at SMU field?

neutralStadium ExperienceFacebook
SMU

What's the seating capacity 20,000.

neutralStadium ExperienceFacebook

Tickets in hand, ready for the Boulevard and kick off. All 20,000+ of us.

positiveCrowd & AttendanceFacebook

Fingerprint duel

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

BaylorSMU
Harm · SMU +5 ptsIdentity-Based Abuse · SMU +7 ptsExplicit Language · Low volumeCollege Sports · SMU +8 ptsOff-Field Storylines · BAY +54 ptsSports Betting · Low volumeTeam & Front Office · BAY +60 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.
  • Baylor Harm: 27th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Baylor Identity-Based Abuse: 4th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Baylor Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Baylor College Sports: 44th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Baylor Off-Field Storylines: 89th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Baylor Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Baylor Team & Front Office: 71st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • SMU Harm: 32nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • SMU Identity-Based Abuse: 11th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • SMU Explicit Language: 35th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • SMU College Sports: 52nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • SMU Off-Field Storylines: 35th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • SMU Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • SMU Team & Front Office: 11th 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. Baylor's positive share was higher in 12 of 22 shared weeks, SMU's in 10.

BAYSMU
0%46%92%Aug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: BAY, SMU
Week ofBAYSMUComments
2025-08-2388.9%75.8%315
2025-08-3042.9%69.7%1,145
2025-09-0675.7%43.3%1,585
2025-09-1373.1%69.4%612
2025-09-2047.6%44.5%779
2025-09-2773%80.5%525
2025-10-0464.9%55.5%1,007
2025-10-1191.7%70.3%359
2025-10-1837.3%80.5%1,053
2025-10-2530.8%48%780
2025-11-0183.7%76.2%1,589
2025-11-0876.1%84.8%547
2025-11-1535.4%83.9%584
2025-11-2240.2%84.3%1,201
2025-11-2966.2%36.3%1,617
2025-12-0670.8%67.2%346
2025-12-1367%49.5%197
2025-12-2078.8%87.8%101
2025-12-2754.1%79.8%399
2026-01-0350%84.4%796
2026-01-1084.4%71.6%225
2026-01-1777.5%57.9%442
Behind the numbers

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