Head to head

Whose comment section wins?

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

MAC
Bowling Green
Falcons
vs
MAC
Miami (Ohio)
RedHawks
BGSU sentiment · 3,685 comments
Positive78.3%
Neutral14.2%
Negative6.9%
Mixed0.6%
M-OH sentiment · 1,085 comments
Positive79%
Neutral8.7%
Negative11.6%
Mixed0.7%
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.

Bowling Green
Miami (Ohio)

Fan Score

782.6
(better)789.9

Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)

Positive share

78.3%
(better)79%

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.

Bowling Green
Miami (Ohio)

Negativity

68.9 (better)
116.1

Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Toxicity

12.8 (better)
13.8

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

Explicit language

1.1 (better)
1.8

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

Identity-based abuse, tag by tag

Tag applications per 1,000 comments

Bowling Green left, Miami (Ohio) 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.

Bowling Green
Miami (Ohio)

Betting talk

0.8
0.9

Sports-betting comments per 1,000

Team & front office talk

75.2
49.8

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

NIL & portal talk

3.5
3.7

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: Bowling Green up, Miami (Ohio) down
Bowling Green positive ↑Miami (Ohio) positive ↓Negative shareHover a W or L for that week’s result
Bowling Green had the happier comment section in 11 of 21 shared weeks, Miami (Ohio) in 10.
Weekly positive and negative comment shares for Bowling Green and Miami (Ohio)
Week ofBowling Green resultBowling Green positive shareBowling Green negative shareMiami (Ohio) resultMiami (Ohio) positive shareMiami (Ohio) negative share
2025-08-23W79.8%5.5%L85.3%5.9%
2025-08-3072.2%5.2%57.1%33.3%
2025-09-06L64.4%4.3%L72.4%13.8%
2025-09-13W77.8%4.9%76.9%7.7%
2025-09-20L86.3%1.6%L51.6%29%
2025-09-27L70.9%14.9%W86.7%3.3%
2025-10-0464.5%10.8%W94%2.4%
2025-10-11W82.2%5.4%W90.6%1.9%
2025-10-18L78.9%7%W81.3%0%
2025-10-25L74.6%12.7%W83.2%4.7%
2025-11-01L68.2%22.4%L63.8%27.6%
2025-11-08L84.1%6.8%L60.9%19.6%
2025-11-15L79.7%13%W88.6%6.4%
2025-11-22W88.4%4.6%89.7%7.7%
2025-11-2983.3%11.1%W83.2%8.8%
2025-12-0683.6%12%L68.1%25%
2025-12-1392%4.5%86.7%13.3%
2025-12-2066.7%17.5%78.4%5.4%
2025-12-2776.7%7.3%L60.8%27.8%
2026-01-0376.9%8.3%
2026-01-1095.3%0%80%0%
2026-01-1795.6%2.2%100%0%

Fingerprint duel

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

Bowling GreenMiami (Ohio)
Harm · Low volumeIdentity-Based Abuse · Low volumeExplicit Language · Low volumeCollege Sports · Low volumeOff-Field Storylines · Low volumeSports Betting · Low volumeTeam & Front Office · Low volume
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.
  • Bowling Green Harm: 3rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Bowling Green Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Bowling Green Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Bowling Green College Sports: 38th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Bowling Green Off-Field Storylines: 8th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Bowling Green Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Bowling Green Team & Front Office: 10th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Miami (Ohio) Harm: low volume, not ranked
  • Miami (Ohio) Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Miami (Ohio) Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Miami (Ohio) College Sports: low volume, not ranked
  • Miami (Ohio) Off-Field Storylines: low volume, not ranked
  • Miami (Ohio) Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Miami (Ohio) Team & Front Office: low volume, not ranked

The season, felt twice

Weekly positive share for both comment sections on one axis; hover shows the week's combined comment volume. Bowling Green's positive share was higher in 10 of 21 shared weeks, Miami (Ohio)'s in 11.

BGSUM-OH
0%50%100%Aug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: BGSU, M-OH
Week ofBGSUM-OHComments
2025-08-2379.8%85.3%524
2025-08-3072.2%57.1%402
2025-09-0664.4%72.4%262
2025-09-1377.8%76.9%216
2025-09-2086.3%51.6%475
2025-09-2770.9%86.7%171
2025-10-0464.5%94%287
2025-10-1182.2%90.6%440
2025-10-1878.9%81.3%103
2025-10-2574.6%83.2%170
2025-11-0168.2%63.8%165
2025-11-0884.1%60.9%90
2025-11-1579.7%88.6%209
2025-11-2288.4%89.7%212
2025-11-2983.3%83.2%161
2025-12-0683.6%68.1%255
2025-12-1392%86.7%103
2025-12-2066.7%78.4%94
2025-12-2776.7%60.8%229
2026-01-0376.9%0%108
2026-01-1095.3%80%48
2026-01-1795.6%100%46
Behind the numbers

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