Arizona

Wildcats · 9–4 in 2025–26

Fan Score
640
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
13,960
2025–26 season
Positive share
64%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
36.5
harm + identity abuse per 1,000 · lower is better
Part one

Who they are

The shape of one comment section: the mix of what gets talked about, how it splits by sentiment, and the subjects Arizona fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out Sports Betting: 14th percentile · College Sports: 20th percentile · Team & Front Office: 26th percentilePercentile of ranked FBS teams per tag group; low-volume fanbases excluded from each cohort.
  • Arizona Harm: 58th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Arizona Identity-Based Abuse: 64th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Arizona Explicit Language: 67th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Arizona College Sports: 20th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Arizona Off-Field Storylines: 50th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Arizona Sports Betting: 14th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Arizona Team & Front Office: 26th percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive64%8,935
Neutral8.4%1,172
Negative26.1%3,646
Mixed1.5%207

Signature subtags

What Arizona fans bring up more than anyone, vs all 138 FBS fanbases.

Team & Front Office
1.7×

Mentioned Crowd & Attendance at 1.7× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

16.4 per 1,000 comments
Harm
1.7×

Mentioned Group Hate at 1.7× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

2.9 per 1,000 comments
Identity-Based Abuse
1.6×

Mentioned LGBTQIA+ at 1.6× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

1.1 per 1,000 comments

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

Part two

How the season felt

Week by week, with every game marked. The comment section keeps its own scoreboard, and it does not always agree with the one on the field.

Season heartbeat

Net comment mood by week (green above the baseline, red below) with every game marked on it. Click a game for that week’s story.

+90%+45%−45%−90%0%Peak: +85% · L 19–24 vs SMULow: −29% · week of Jan 3Aug 30: W 40–6 vs HawaiiWSep 6: W 48–3 vs Weber StWSep 12: W 23–17 vs Kansas StateWSep 27: L 14–39 at Iowa StateLOct 4: W 41–13 vs Oklahoma StateWOct 11: L 27–33 (2OT) vs BYULOct 18: L 28–31 at HoustonLNov 1: W 52–17 at ColoradoWNov 8: W 24–20 vs KansasWNov 15: W 30–24 at CincinnatiWNov 22: W 41–17 vs BaylorWNov 28: W 23–7 at Arizona StateWJan 2: L 19–24 vs SMULAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+47%351249No game
2025-08-30+64%16427214W 40–6 vs Hawaii
2025-09-06+36%286115480W 48–3 vs Weber St; W 23–17 vs Kansas State
2025-09-13+48%394118574No game
2025-09-20+49%17145258No game
2025-09-27−21%324520951L 14–39 at Iowa State
2025-10-04+42%320114491W 41–13 vs Oklahoma State
2025-10-11−22%3586001,076L 27–33 (2OT) vs BYU
2025-10-18−23%175298528L 28–31 at Houston
2025-10-25+78%11412130No game
2025-11-01+65%48882620W 52–17 at Colorado
2025-11-08+65%687112885W 24–20 vs Kansas
2025-11-15+65%9011441,166W 30–24 at Cincinnati
2025-11-22+65%8591481,095W 41–17 vs Baylor; W 23–7 at Arizona State
2025-11-29+59%1,6283552,153No game
2025-12-06+55%38691541No game
2025-12-13+80%21718249No game
2025-12-20+81%13812156No game
2025-12-27+85%57628642L 19–24 vs SMU
2026-01-03−29%3807521,285No game
2026-01-10+80%23920275No game
2026-01-17+51%9523142No game
Fan mood fell 114 points the week of Jan 3.

Season trend

Weekly share of positive and negative comments with every game marked: click a dot for that week's story.

PositiveNegative
0%45%90%Aug 30: W 40–6 vs HawaiiWSep 6: W 48–3 vs Weber StWSep 12: W 23–17 vs Kansas StateWSep 27: L 14–39 at Iowa StateLOct 4: W 41–13 vs Oklahoma StateWOct 11: L 27–33 (2OT) vs BYULOct 18: L 28–31 at HoustonLNov 1: W 52–17 at ColoradoWNov 8: W 24–20 vs KansasWNov 15: W 30–24 at CincinnatiWNov 22: W 41–17 vs BaylorWNov 28: W 23–7 at Arizona StateWJan 2: L 19–24 vs SMULAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2371.4%24.5%49
2025-08-3076.6%12.6%214
2025-09-0659.6%24%480
2025-09-1368.6%20.6%574
2025-09-2066.3%17.4%258
2025-09-2734.1%54.7%951
2025-10-0465.2%23.2%491
2025-10-1133.3%55.8%1,076
2025-10-1833.1%56.4%528
2025-10-2587.7%9.2%130
2025-11-0178.7%13.2%620
2025-11-0877.6%12.7%885
2025-11-1577.3%12.3%1,166
2025-11-2278.4%13.5%1,095
2025-11-2975.6%16.5%2,153
2025-12-0671.3%16.8%541
2025-12-1387.1%7.2%249
2025-12-2088.5%7.7%156
2025-12-2789.7%4.4%642
2026-01-0329.6%58.5%1,285
2026-01-1086.9%7.3%275
2026-01-1766.9%16.2%142

Season timeline

Part three

What they actually said

The language, the moderation load, and the comments themselves, exactly as they were posted.

Comment insights

Classified comments per 1,000, by system-tag group.

Harm28.6 per 1,000 · 399
Personal Attacks 351Group Hate 41Sexual Content 12Death Threat 1Harm Wish 7
Identity-Based Abuse8 per 1,000 · 111
Race 13LGBTQIA+ 16Disability 19Gender 29Physical Appearance 26Age 6Religion 5
Explicit Language29.5 per 1,000 · 412
Violent Language 6Explicit Words 341Explicit Acronym 68Explicit Emoji 7
College Sports10 per 1,000 · 140
NIL 40Recruiting 38Band 15Transfer Portal 26Conference Realignment 17Student Section 13
Off-Field Storylines29.5 per 1,000 · 412
Officiating 218Broadcast & Media 137Injuries 44Politics & Activism 8Player Conduct 10
Sports Betting2.2 per 1,000 · 31
Gambling 29Prop Bet 1Parlay 1
Team & Front Office103.6 per 1,000 · 1,446
Opponent Respect 68Opponent Hostility 393Crowd & Attendance 229Front Office 15Coaching 720Stadium Experience 61Athletic Department 4

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

67th percentile
412 explicit comments29.5 per 1,000
  • Explicit Words341
  • Explicit Acronym68
  • Explicit Emoji7
  • Violent Language6

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 29.5 of every 1,000 comments on this page: 34th of 100 nationally, the 67th percentile.

Moderation snapshot

Harm & identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments · by week
season avg 36.5100.9 per 1,000 · L 14–39 at Iowa StateWWWLWLLWWWWWL2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-2340.8No game
2025-08-3023.4W 40–6 vs Hawaii
2025-09-0637.5W 48–3 vs Weber St; W 23–17 vs Kansas State
2025-09-1336.6No game
2025-09-2011.6No game
2025-09-27100.9L 14–39 at Iowa State
2025-10-0432.6W 41–13 vs Oklahoma State
2025-10-1166.9L 27–33 (2OT) vs BYU
2025-10-1853L 28–31 at Houston
2025-10-2523.1No game
2025-11-0125.8W 52–17 at Colorado
2025-11-0827.1W 24–20 vs Kansas
2025-11-156.9W 30–24 at Cincinnati
2025-11-2216.4W 41–17 vs Baylor; W 23–7 at Arizona State
2025-11-2925.5No game
2025-12-0655.5No game
2025-12-138No game
2025-12-206.4No game
2025-12-276.2L 19–24 vs SMU
2026-01-0360.7No game
2026-01-1014.5No game
2026-01-1742.3No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 100.9 per 1,000 comments (L 14–39 at Iowa State) against a season average of 36.5 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

Season totals of the classifications Sence applied to comments on this page.

Harm
  • Personal Attacks351
  • Group Hate41
  • Sexual Content12
  • Harm Wish7
  • Death Threat1
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Gender29
  • Physical Appearance26
  • Disability19
  • LGBTQIA+16
  • Race13
  • Age6
  • Religion5

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Sence flags these in real time so page owners can act before fans see them.

From the comment section

I like the theme.. let’s finish the year with bowling too!

positiveFacebook

Kept my eyes wide open when he ran with the football. A great running back!

positiveFacebook

Cut out the bayonet bullshit! I am a U of A proud graduate, but this does not sit well with me

negativeExplicit WordsFacebook

Too many Karen, comments Beardown cats you got this continue like y'all started the game.

mixedFacebook
Behind the numbers

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