Head to head

Whose comment section wins?

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

American
Memphis
Tigers
vs
American
Tulsa
Golden Hurricane
On the field
Memphis won 457 on Oct 4.
The comment sections had their own opinions.
MEM sentiment · 12,047 comments
Positive70.3%
Neutral10%
Negative18.3%
Mixed1.4%
TLSA sentiment · 2,677 comments
Positive83.9%
Neutral7.7%
Negative7.7%
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.

Memphis
Tulsa

Fan Score

703.4
(better)839

Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)

Positive share

70.3%
(better)83.9%

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.

Memphis
Tulsa

Negativity

183.3
(better)77.3

Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Toxicity

23.5
(better)7.1

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

Explicit language

6.6 (better)
8.2

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

Identity-based abuse, tag by tag

Tag applications per 1,000 comments

Memphis left, Tulsa 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.

Memphis
Tulsa

Betting talk

2.7
0

Sports-betting comments per 1,000

Team & front office talk

134.4
64.3

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

NIL & portal talk

4.3
9.3

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: Memphis up, Tulsa down
Memphis positive ↑Tulsa positive ↓Negative shareHover a W or L for that week’s result
MEM 45TLSA 7
Memphis had the happier comment section in 3 of 22 shared weeks, Tulsa in 19. When they met on Oct 4, Memphis won 45–7; Memphis’s comments were the more positive that week.
Weekly positive and negative comment shares for Memphis and Tulsa
Week ofMemphis resultMemphis positive shareMemphis negative shareTulsa resultTulsa positive shareTulsa negative share
2025-08-2373.5%12.6%70%7.5%
2025-08-30W67.9%14%W90%1.5%
2025-09-06W73.2%15.7%L79.3%15%
2025-09-13W69%16%L W74.3%16.2%
2025-09-20W69.3%20.7%84.9%9.7%
2025-09-27W73.4%12.6%L64.7%19.1%
2025-10-04W84.6%7.7%L75.6%14.4%
2025-10-1157%22.1%L87.2%8.5%
2025-10-18L62.3%26.2%85.5%5.5%
2025-10-25W W78.7%11.5%L81.3%8.3%
2025-11-01L70.6%14.7%87.8%2%
2025-11-0856.7%32.8%L68.8%16.3%
2025-11-15L55.9%32.3%W96.3%1.6%
2025-11-22L72%16.9%W90.2%5%
2025-11-2941.7%40.1%L80.9%8%
2025-12-0672.8%18.2%95%0%
2025-12-13L67.2%22.5%94.7%0%
2025-12-2072.5%16.5%100%0%
2025-12-2768.8%22.2%64.2%14.6%
2026-01-0362.4%27.5%81.6%5.7%
2026-01-1067.1%21.3%91.3%0%
2026-01-1790.6%4.2%89.4%4.5%
Reactions from that night · Oct 4
Memphis

Shuttles + updates = game day made easy 🔥

positiveStadium ExperienceFacebook

I only wish they could fill a stadium

negativeCrowd & AttendanceFacebook
Tulsa

Lamb, Please make adjustments at halftime. We need to score in the second half.

negativeCoachingFacebook

Fire all the coaches AGAIN!!!!!!!

negativeCoachingFacebook

Fingerprint duel

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

MemphisTulsa
Harm · Low volumeIdentity-Based Abuse · Low volumeExplicit Language · Low volumeCollege Sports · TLSA +2 ptsOff-Field Storylines · MEM +4 ptsSports Betting · Low volumeTeam & Front Office · MEM +58 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.
  • Memphis Harm: 38th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Memphis Identity-Based Abuse: 16th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Memphis Explicit Language: 11th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Memphis College Sports: 47th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Memphis Off-Field Storylines: 15th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Memphis Sports Betting: 33rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Memphis Team & Front Office: 61st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Tulsa Harm: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa College Sports: 49th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Tulsa Off-Field Storylines: 11th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Tulsa Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa Team & Front Office: 3rd 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. Memphis's positive share was higher in 5 of 22 shared weeks, Tulsa's in 17.

MEMTLSA
0%50%100%Aug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: MEM, TLSA
Week ofMEMTLSAComments
2025-08-2373.5%70%270
2025-08-3067.9%90%908
2025-09-0673.2%79.3%394
2025-09-1369%74.3%698
2025-09-2069.3%84.9%2,466
2025-09-2773.4%64.7%538
2025-10-0484.6%75.6%752
2025-10-1157%87.2%366
2025-10-1862.3%85.5%307
2025-10-2578.7%81.3%1,046
2025-11-0170.6%87.8%478
2025-11-0856.7%68.8%385
2025-11-1555.9%96.3%376
2025-11-2272%90.2%675
2025-11-2941.7%80.9%571
2025-12-0672.8%95%2,193
2025-12-1367.2%94.7%870
2025-12-2072.5%100%238
2025-12-2768.8%64.2%299
2026-01-0362.4%81.6%307
2026-01-1067.1%91.3%256
2026-01-1790.6%89.4%331
Behind the numbers

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