Head to head

Whose comment section wins?

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

Big 12
Houston
Cougars
vs
ACC
SMU
Mustangs
HOU sentiment · 17,558 comments
Positive68.3%
Neutral8.2%
Negative22.1%
Mixed1.4%
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.

Houston
SMU

Fan Score

683.2 (better)
681.5

Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)

Positive share

68.3% (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.

Houston
SMU

Negativity

220.8
(better)198.5

Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Toxicity

29.8
(better)21.4

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

Explicit language

22.7
(better)13.3

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

Identity-based abuse, tag by tag

Tag applications per 1,000 comments

0.5Race0.8
0.9Gender0.7
0.3LGBTQIA+0.1
0.6Age0.3

Houston 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.

Houston
SMU

Betting talk

2.8
2.8

Sports-betting comments per 1,000

Team & front office talk

115.8
77.1

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

NIL & portal talk

5.6
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: Houston up, SMU down
Houston positive ↑SMU positive ↓Negative shareHover a W or L for that week’s result
Houston had the happier comment section in 13 of 22 shared weeks, SMU in 9.
Weekly positive and negative comment shares for Houston and SMU
Week ofHouston resultHouston positive shareHouston negative shareSMU resultSMU positive shareSMU negative share
2025-08-23W65.7%21.2%75.8%4.6%
2025-08-3074.3%15.4%W69.7%13.4%
2025-09-06W W79%12.8%L43.3%43.6%
2025-09-1375.7%17.1%W69.4%18.8%
2025-09-20W79%12%L44.5%42.6%
2025-09-2759.2%28.5%80.5%5.1%
2025-10-04L49.5%37.3%W55.5%29.6%
2025-10-11W80.9%11.4%W70.3%17.9%
2025-10-18W81.1%10.3%W80.5%12.7%
2025-10-25W86.4%7.5%L48%37.4%
2025-11-01L W47.2%46.4%W76.2%13.2%
2025-11-0873.3%18.4%W84.8%6%
2025-11-1576.8%15.9%83.9%4%
2025-11-22L47.6%44%W84.3%7.4%
2025-11-29W82.7%10.8%L36.3%54.7%
2025-12-0666.8%10.7%67.2%14.9%
2025-12-1375.8%13%49.5%30.3%
2025-12-2085.1%5%87.8%4.1%
2025-12-27W57.3%34.3%W79.8%6.4%
2026-01-0383.9%7.4%84.4%8.2%
2026-01-1081%7.9%71.6%14.2%
2026-01-1773.8%17.9%57.9%5.6%

Fingerprint duel

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

HoustonSMU
Harm · HOU +16 ptsIdentity-Based Abuse · HOU +9 ptsExplicit Language · HOU +19 ptsCollege Sports · SMU +21 ptsOff-Field Storylines · SMU +2 ptsSports Betting · Low volumeTeam & Front Office · HOU +28 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.
  • Houston Harm: 48th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Houston Identity-Based Abuse: 20th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Houston Explicit Language: 54th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Houston College Sports: 31st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Houston Off-Field Storylines: 33rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Houston Sports Betting: 40th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Houston Team & Front Office: 39th 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. Houston's positive share was higher in 11 of 22 shared weeks, SMU's in 11.

HOUSMU
0%44%88%Aug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: HOU, SMU
Week ofHOUSMUComments
2025-08-2365.7%75.8%809
2025-08-3074.3%69.7%912
2025-09-0679%43.3%1,271
2025-09-1375.7%69.4%1,012
2025-09-2079%44.5%656
2025-09-2759.2%80.5%1,828
2025-10-0449.5%55.5%1,496
2025-10-1180.9%70.3%906
2025-10-1881.1%80.5%1,731
2025-10-2586.4%48%1,760
2025-11-0147.2%76.2%2,108
2025-11-0873.3%84.8%1,049
2025-11-1576.8%83.9%494
2025-11-2247.6%84.3%1,190
2025-11-2982.7%36.3%1,385
2025-12-0666.8%67.2%909
2025-12-1375.8%49.5%439
2025-12-2085.1%87.8%547
2025-12-2757.3%79.8%2,736
2026-01-0383.9%84.4%1,079
2026-01-1081%71.6%337
2026-01-1773.8%57.9%294
Behind the numbers

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