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
Cincinnati left, Oklahoma State 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 | Cincinnati result | Cincinnati positive share | Cincinnati negative share | Oklahoma State result | Oklahoma State positive share | Oklahoma State negative share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-23 | L | 40.8% | 41.8% | W | 53.5% | 30.2% |
| 2025-08-30 | – | 36.9% | 48.1% | – | 47.6% | 39.8% |
| 2025-09-06 | W | 68.9% | 23.3% | L | 28.9% | 42.1% |
| 2025-09-13 | W | 53.2% | 31.5% | L | 49% | 36.7% |
| 2025-09-20 | – | 49.6% | 41.7% | – | 40% | 46.1% |
| 2025-09-27 | W | 73.5% | 12.6% | L | 51.8% | 34.4% |
| 2025-10-04 | W | 62.1% | 23.8% | L | 43.1% | 43% |
| 2025-10-11 | W | 67.1% | 18.1% | L | 57.8% | 30.8% |
| 2025-10-18 | W | 70.1% | 9.6% | L | 45.8% | 41.5% |
| 2025-10-25 | W | 62.7% | 23.3% | L | 46.8% | 41.8% |
| 2025-11-01 | L | 47.8% | 41.2% | L | 52.9% | 33.3% |
| 2025-11-08 | – | 69.1% | 17.1% | – | 50.3% | 37.9% |
| 2025-11-15 | L | 34.9% | 56.1% | L | 58.3% | 28.7% |
| 2025-11-22 | L | 35.1% | 53.7% | L | 51.3% | 34.8% |
| 2025-11-29 | L | 28.5% | 61.5% | L | 65.7% | 21.8% |
| 2025-12-06 | – | 49.2% | 35.9% | – | 66.3% | 22.7% |
| 2025-12-13 | – | 62.4% | 20.8% | – | 59.4% | 27.5% |
| 2025-12-20 | – | 50.6% | 35.3% | – | 66.9% | 17.8% |
| 2025-12-27 | L | 66.5% | 24.1% | – | 55% | 31.4% |
| 2026-01-03 | – | 22.2% | 67.9% | – | 51.1% | 33.2% |
| 2026-01-10 | – | 74.5% | 17.6% | – | 57.5% | 33.1% |
| 2026-01-17 | – | 44.4% | 33.3% | – | 32.4% | 48.9% |
“You want the one next to Wes Miller, so you can kindly inform him this is his last season coaching at Cincinnati.”
“4A.....would be #53 Gavin Gerhardt, so I choose 4B!!”
“Good player. Gundy, the coaches and the players gave him a second chance in spite of his stupid crime. So can all of us. Glad he got the honor.”
“So he’s showing off his skills when he jumps into the portal this off-season?”
Fingerprint duel
Each fanbase's national percentile on the seven comment-topic groups, overlaid.
- Cincinnati Harm: 68th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Cincinnati Identity-Based Abuse: 56th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Cincinnati Explicit Language: 17th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Cincinnati College Sports: 57th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Cincinnati Off-Field Storylines: 82nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Cincinnati Sports Betting: 17th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Cincinnati Team & Front Office: 54th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Oklahoma State Harm: 94th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Oklahoma State Identity-Based Abuse: 91st percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Oklahoma State Explicit Language: 59th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Oklahoma State College Sports: 96th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Oklahoma State Off-Field Storylines: 42nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Oklahoma State Sports Betting: 81st percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Oklahoma State Team & Front Office: 72nd 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. Cincinnati's positive share was higher in 13 of 22 shared weeks, Oklahoma State's in 9.
| Week of | CIN | OKST | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-23 | 40.8% | 53.5% | 3,886 |
| 2025-08-30 | 36.9% | 47.6% | 1,442 |
| 2025-09-06 | 68.9% | 28.9% | 3,504 |
| 2025-09-13 | 53.2% | 49% | 1,092 |
| 2025-09-20 | 49.6% | 40% | 2,973 |
| 2025-09-27 | 73.5% | 51.8% | 2,154 |
| 2025-10-04 | 62.1% | 43.1% | 2,188 |
| 2025-10-11 | 67.1% | 57.8% | 1,932 |
| 2025-10-18 | 70.1% | 45.8% | 1,685 |
| 2025-10-25 | 62.7% | 46.8% | 2,345 |
| 2025-11-01 | 47.8% | 52.9% | 1,421 |
| 2025-11-08 | 69.1% | 50.3% | 632 |
| 2025-11-15 | 34.9% | 58.3% | 1,368 |
| 2025-11-22 | 35.1% | 51.3% | 3,150 |
| 2025-11-29 | 28.5% | 65.7% | 1,687 |
| 2025-12-06 | 49.2% | 66.3% | 2,279 |
| 2025-12-13 | 62.4% | 59.4% | 850 |
| 2025-12-20 | 50.6% | 66.9% | 313 |
| 2025-12-27 | 66.5% | 55% | 684 |
| 2026-01-03 | 22.2% | 51.1% | 1,634 |
| 2026-01-10 | 74.5% | 57.5% | 489 |
| 2026-01-17 | 44.4% | 32.4% | 505 |