Head to head

Whose comment section wins?

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

MAC
Miami (Ohio)
RedHawks
vs
Big Ten
Rutgers
Scarlet Knights
On the field
Rutgers won 4517 on Sep 6.
The comment sections had their own opinions.
M-OH sentiment · 1,085 comments
Positive79%
Neutral8.7%
Negative11.6%
Mixed0.7%
RUTG sentiment · 5,649 comments
Positive50.9%
Neutral9.3%
Negative37.5%
Mixed2.4%
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.

Miami (Ohio)
Rutgers

Fan Score

789.9 (better)
508.6

Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)

Positive share

79% (better)
50.9%

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.

Miami (Ohio)
Rutgers

Negativity

116.1 (better)
374.6

Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Toxicity

13.8 (better)
34.7

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

Explicit language

1.8 (better)
13.6

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

Identity-based abuse, tag by tag

Tag applications per 1,000 comments

Miami (Ohio) left, Rutgers 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.

Miami (Ohio)
Rutgers

Betting talk

0.9
5.1

Sports-betting comments per 1,000

Team & front office talk

49.8
107.6

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

NIL & portal talk

3.7
11.3

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: Miami (Ohio) up, Rutgers down
Miami (Ohio) positive ↑Rutgers positive ↓Negative shareHover a W or L for that week’s result
M-OH 17RUTG 45
Miami (Ohio) had the happier comment section in 20 of 21 shared weeks, Rutgers in 1. When they met on Sep 6, Rutgers won 45–17; Miami (Ohio)’s comments were the more positive that week.
Weekly positive and negative comment shares for Miami (Ohio) and Rutgers
Week ofMiami (Ohio) resultMiami (Ohio) positive shareMiami (Ohio) negative shareRutgers resultRutgers positive shareRutgers negative share
2025-08-23L85.3%5.9%W49.3%35.5%
2025-08-3057.1%33.3%53.6%38.1%
2025-09-06L72.4%13.8%W63.6%23.2%
2025-09-1376.9%7.7%W L53.8%30.8%
2025-09-20L51.6%29%36.2%53.3%
2025-09-27W86.7%3.3%L33.9%56.6%
2025-10-04W94%2.4%L81.1%10%
2025-10-11W90.6%1.9%27.1%60.2%
2025-10-18W81.3%0%L39.4%48.4%
2025-10-25W83.2%4.7%W64.5%24.6%
2025-11-01L63.8%27.6%L55.1%34.8%
2025-11-08L60.9%19.6%W63.1%28%
2025-11-15W88.6%6.4%70.7%17.9%
2025-11-2289.7%7.7%L34.8%53%
2025-11-29W83.2%8.8%L34.6%53.3%
2025-12-06L68.1%25%69%24.1%
2025-12-1386.7%13.3%50%0%
2025-12-2078.4%5.4%66.7%33.3%
2025-12-27L60.8%27.8%16.7%50%
2026-01-0374.1%22.2%
2026-01-1080%0%78.3%8.7%
2026-01-17100%0%70.7%18.7%
Reactions from that night · Sep 6
Miami (Ohio)

Watched this game today. Was a good game but refs didnt help us

mixedOfficiatingFacebook

These refs at this game need fired and fined

negativeOfficiatingFacebook
Rutgers

Can't wait to see RU rain or shine I'll be there 🏈🏈🏈

positiveCrowd & AttendanceFacebook

Hey if you are going to promote family friend games how about you don’t play sounds super load in the stadium that drop f bombs….

negativeStadium ExperienceFacebook

Fingerprint duel

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

Miami (Ohio)Rutgers
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.
  • 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
  • Rutgers Harm: 61st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Identity-Based Abuse: 21st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Explicit Language: 37th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers College Sports: 87th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Off-Field Storylines: 53rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Sports Betting: 87th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Team & Front Office: 32nd 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. Miami (Ohio)'s positive share was higher in 19 of 21 shared weeks, Rutgers's in 2.

M-OHRUTG
0%50%100%Aug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: M-OH, RUTG
Week ofM-OHRUTGComments
2025-08-2385.3%49.3%575
2025-08-3057.1%53.6%105
2025-09-0672.4%63.6%430
2025-09-1376.9%53.8%558
2025-09-2051.6%36.2%498
2025-09-2786.7%33.9%475
2025-10-0494%81.1%174
2025-10-1190.6%27.1%219
2025-10-1881.3%39.4%220
2025-10-2583.2%64.5%659
2025-11-0163.8%55.1%196
2025-11-0860.9%63.1%797
2025-11-1588.6%70.7%413
2025-11-2289.7%34.8%203
2025-11-2983.2%34.6%836
2025-12-0668.1%69%101
2025-12-1386.7%50%19
2025-12-2078.4%66.7%40
2025-12-2760.8%16.7%85
2026-01-030%74.1%27
2026-01-1080%78.3%28
2026-01-17100%70.7%76
Behind the numbers

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