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
Michigan left, Purdue 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 | Michigan result | Michigan positive share | Michigan negative share | Purdue result | Purdue positive share | Purdue negative share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-23 | – | 63% | 26.6% | – | 69.7% | 23.4% |
| 2025-08-30 | W | 54.9% | 34.6% | W | 80.2% | 10.8% |
| 2025-09-06 | L | 28.6% | 63.1% | W | 70.1% | 14.7% |
| 2025-09-13 | W | 51.1% | 39.1% | L | 55.8% | 24.6% |
| 2025-09-20 | W | 48.6% | 41.3% | L | 57.1% | 33.6% |
| 2025-09-27 | – | 56.9% | 27.7% | – | 80.6% | 8.3% |
| 2025-10-04 | W | 59.4% | 32.1% | L | 57.6% | 30.8% |
| 2025-10-11 | L | 25.1% | 66.8% | L | 52.1% | 40.3% |
| 2025-10-18 | W | 58.7% | 32.3% | L | 39% | 49.2% |
| 2025-10-25 | W | 52.5% | 39% | L | 33.5% | 56% |
| 2025-11-01 | W | 40.2% | 49.6% | L | 60.9% | 27.9% |
| 2025-11-08 | – | 55.4% | 31.1% | L | 52.1% | 40.7% |
| 2025-11-15 | W | 43.9% | 43.3% | L | 30.1% | 55.9% |
| 2025-11-22 | W | 67.2% | 21.8% | L | 36.3% | 48% |
| 2025-11-29 | L | 33.5% | 54.1% | – | 53.3% | 33.6% |
| 2025-12-06 | – | 41.2% | 44.7% | – | 51.9% | 25% |
| 2025-12-13 | – | 43.6% | 44.4% | – | 24.2% | 60.2% |
| 2025-12-20 | – | 52% | 36.9% | – | 42.2% | 51.7% |
| 2025-12-27 | L | 52.8% | 37.7% | – | 66.4% | 24.8% |
| 2026-01-03 | – | 56.9% | 30.5% | – | 73.3% | 18.3% |
| 2026-01-10 | – | 61% | 23.3% | – | 58.5% | 22.6% |
| 2026-01-17 | – | 62.9% | 24.8% | – | 18.5% | 70.4% |
“I think most u of m athletes are decent people, but the university is a pathetic, woke shithole.”
“Why not give this kid a shot as a slot receiver. He looks like he’d also be good at returning punts. Seems smart enough to not fair catch them at the 3 yard line! lol”
“Hmmmm. Hold em under 50=win”
“What time is the game what channel, Purdue Grandma wants to know! Thanks”
Fingerprint duel
Each fanbase's national percentile on the seven comment-topic groups, overlaid.
- Michigan Harm: 98th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Michigan Identity-Based Abuse: 96th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Michigan Explicit Language: 98th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Michigan College Sports: 41st percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Michigan Off-Field Storylines: 48th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Michigan Sports Betting: 60th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Michigan Team & Front Office: 75th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Purdue Harm: 40th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Purdue Identity-Based Abuse: 23rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Purdue Explicit Language: 36th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Purdue College Sports: 79th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Purdue Off-Field Storylines: 47th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Purdue Sports Betting: 76th percentile of ranked FBS teams
- Purdue Team & Front Office: 67th 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. Michigan's positive share was higher in 10 of 22 shared weeks, Purdue's in 12.
| Week of | MICH | PUR | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-08-23 | 63% | 69.7% | 3,643 |
| 2025-08-30 | 54.9% | 80.2% | 9,737 |
| 2025-09-06 | 28.6% | 70.1% | 10,655 |
| 2025-09-13 | 51.1% | 55.8% | 5,934 |
| 2025-09-20 | 48.6% | 57.1% | 6,054 |
| 2025-09-27 | 56.9% | 80.6% | 2,104 |
| 2025-10-04 | 59.4% | 57.6% | 5,235 |
| 2025-10-11 | 25.1% | 52.1% | 8,854 |
| 2025-10-18 | 58.7% | 39% | 6,190 |
| 2025-10-25 | 52.5% | 33.5% | 7,405 |
| 2025-11-01 | 40.2% | 60.9% | 7,095 |
| 2025-11-08 | 55.4% | 52.1% | 2,329 |
| 2025-11-15 | 43.9% | 30.1% | 10,148 |
| 2025-11-22 | 67.2% | 36.3% | 10,494 |
| 2025-11-29 | 33.5% | 53.3% | 15,411 |
| 2025-12-06 | 41.2% | 51.9% | 4,180 |
| 2025-12-13 | 43.6% | 24.2% | 3,508 |
| 2025-12-20 | 52% | 42.2% | 2,757 |
| 2025-12-27 | 52.8% | 66.4% | 12,880 |
| 2026-01-03 | 56.9% | 73.3% | 3,346 |
| 2026-01-10 | 61% | 58.5% | 1,204 |
| 2026-01-17 | 62.9% | 18.5% | 741 |