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
Wisconsin
Badgers
On the field
Wisconsin won 170 on Aug 28.
The comment sections had their own opinions.
M-OH sentiment · 1,085 comments
Positive79%
Neutral8.7%
Negative11.6%
Mixed0.7%
WIS sentiment · 48,811 comments
Positive28.2%
Neutral11%
Negative59.1%
Mixed1.7%
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.

Miami (Ohio)
Wisconsin

Fan Score

789.9 (better)
281.5

Positive comments per 1,000 (higher wins)

Positive share

79% (better)
28.2%

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)
Wisconsin

Negativity

116.1 (better)
591

Negative comments per 1,000 (lower wins)

Toxicity

13.8 (better)
54.3

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

Explicit language

1.8 (better)
40.3

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

Identity-based abuse, tag by tag

Tag applications per 1,000 comments

Miami (Ohio) left, Wisconsin 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)
Wisconsin

Betting talk

0.9
13.6

Sports-betting comments per 1,000

Team & front office talk

49.8
222.7

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

NIL & portal talk

3.7
19.5

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, Wisconsin down
Miami (Ohio) positive ↑Wisconsin positive ↓Negative shareHover a W or L for that week’s result
M-OH 0WIS 17
Miami (Ohio) had the happier comment section in 21 of 21 shared weeks, Wisconsin in 0. When they met on Aug 28, Wisconsin won 17–0; Miami (Ohio)’s comments were the more positive that week.
Weekly positive and negative comment shares for Miami (Ohio) and Wisconsin
Week ofMiami (Ohio) resultMiami (Ohio) positive shareMiami (Ohio) negative shareWisconsin resultWisconsin positive shareWisconsin negative share
2025-08-23L85.3%5.9%W34.3%52.1%
2025-08-3057.1%33.3%38.3%50.1%
2025-09-06L72.4%13.8%W32.4%56.2%
2025-09-1376.9%7.7%L19.2%67.5%
2025-09-20L51.6%29%L13.7%77.1%
2025-09-27W86.7%3.3%17.6%70.2%
2025-10-04W94%2.4%L24.1%61.9%
2025-10-11W90.6%1.9%L16.5%71.6%
2025-10-18W81.3%0%L19.1%67.6%
2025-10-25W83.2%4.7%L27.2%58%
2025-11-01L63.8%27.6%22.7%60.6%
2025-11-08L60.9%19.6%W55.2%34%
2025-11-15W88.6%6.4%L36.8%48.9%
2025-11-2289.7%7.7%W59.7%29.3%
2025-11-29W83.2%8.8%L25.6%56%
2025-12-06L68.1%25%52.3%38.2%
2025-12-1386.7%13.3%60.4%22.9%
2025-12-2078.4%5.4%40.4%44.2%
2025-12-27L60.8%27.8%57.8%29.9%
2026-01-0341.5%42.9%
2026-01-1080%0%49%36.2%
2026-01-17100%0%50%42.9%
Reactions from that night · Aug 28
Miami (Ohio)

I searched and can't find it on TV down here in FL?

neutralBroadcast & MediaFacebook

Keith W Seckel it’s on BTN. ( Big Ten network) I’m getting fubu’s free trial to watch it.

positiveBroadcast & MediaFacebook
Wisconsin

Miss the days of Alvarez.

negativeCoachingFacebook

He was such a terrible hire.

negativeCoachingFacebook

Fingerprint duel

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

Miami (Ohio)Wisconsin
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
  • Wisconsin Harm: 87th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Wisconsin Identity-Based Abuse: 56th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Wisconsin Explicit Language: 88th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Wisconsin College Sports: 95th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Wisconsin Off-Field Storylines: 43rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Wisconsin Sports Betting: 100th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Wisconsin Team & Front Office: 96th 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 21 of 21 shared weeks, Wisconsin's in 0.

M-OHWIS
0%50%100%Aug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: M-OH, WIS
Week ofM-OHWISComments
2025-08-2385.3%34.3%2,475
2025-08-3057.1%38.3%762
2025-09-0672.4%32.4%2,462
2025-09-1376.9%19.2%4,099
2025-09-2051.6%13.7%5,117
2025-09-2786.7%17.6%1,217
2025-10-0494%24.1%2,779
2025-10-1190.6%16.5%7,331
2025-10-1881.3%19.1%5,146
2025-10-2583.2%27.2%2,715
2025-11-0163.8%22.7%1,321
2025-11-0860.9%55.2%4,488
2025-11-1588.6%36.8%2,491
2025-11-2289.7%59.7%2,048
2025-11-2983.2%25.6%2,758
2025-12-0668.1%52.3%378
2025-12-1386.7%60.4%63
2025-12-2078.4%40.4%141
2025-12-2760.8%57.8%226
2026-01-030%41.5%1,309
2026-01-1080%49%201
2026-01-17100%50%369
Behind the numbers

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