Kent State

Golden Flashes · 5–7 in 2025–26

Fan Score
709
positive per 1,000 comments
Low volume, not ranked
Comments analyzed
708
2025–26 season
Positive share
70.9%
of all fan comments
Low volume, not ranked
Toxicity
2.8
harm + identity abuse per 1,000 · lower is better
Low volume, not ranked
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 Kent State fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Comment volume too low to rank tag groups.Percentile of ranked FBS teams per tag group; low-volume fanbases excluded from each cohort.
  • Kent State Harm: low volume, not ranked
  • Kent State Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Kent State Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Kent State College Sports: low volume, not ranked
  • Kent State Off-Field Storylines: low volume, not ranked
  • Kent State Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Kent State Team & Front Office: low volume, not ranked

Sentiment

Positive70.9%502
Neutral16.7%118
Negative11.2%79
Mixed1.3%9
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.

+100%+50%−50%−100%0%Peak: +91% · L 14–62 at Texas TechLow: −15% · L 0–44 at OklahomaAug 30: W 21–17 vs MerrimackWSep 6: L 14–62 at Texas TechLSep 13: L 28–31 vs BuffaloLSep 20: L 10–66 at Florida StateLOct 4: L 0–44 at OklahomaLOct 11: W 42–6 vs UMassWOct 18: L 10–45 at ToledoLOct 25: W 24–21 vs Bowling GreenWNov 5: L 13–17 at Ball StateLNov 11: W 42–35 (OT) at AkronWNov 19: L 16–28 vs Central MichiganLNov 28: W 35–31 at Northern IllinoisWAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+29%17542No game
2025-08-30+57%36653W 21–17 vs Merrimack
2025-09-06+91%86391L 14–62 at Texas Tech
2025-09-13+50%19430L 28–31 vs Buffalo
2025-09-20+0%001L 10–66 at Florida State
2025-09-27+55%36655No game
2025-10-04−15%71020L 0–44 at Oklahoma
2025-10-11+45%6111W 42–6 vs UMass
2025-10-18+67%12018L 10–45 at Toledo
2025-10-25+87%1478160W 24–21 vs Bowling Green
2025-11-01+60%25435L 13–17 at Ball State
2025-11-08+69%11016W 42–35 (OT) at Akron
2025-11-15+41%16429L 16–28 vs Central Michigan
2025-11-22+81%13016W 35–31 at Northern Illinois
2025-11-29+25%6216No game
2025-12-06+86%607No game
2025-12-13+52%25342No game
2025-12-20+90%9010No game
2025-12-27+80%405No game
2026-01-03No comments000No game
2026-01-10−13%131838No game
2026-01-17+23%8513No game
Mood climbed for 3 straight weeks after the week they lost by 44 at Oklahoma, gaining 102 points.

Season trend

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

PositiveNegative
0%47%95%Aug 30: W 21–17 vs MerrimackWSep 6: L 14–62 at Texas TechLSep 13: L 28–31 vs BuffaloLSep 20: L 10–66 at Florida StateLOct 4: L 0–44 at OklahomaLOct 11: W 42–6 vs UMassWOct 18: L 10–45 at ToledoLOct 25: W 24–21 vs Bowling GreenWNov 5: L 13–17 at Ball StateLNov 11: W 42–35 (OT) at AkronWNov 19: L 16–28 vs Central MichiganLNov 28: W 35–31 at Northern IllinoisWAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2340.5%11.9%42
2025-08-3067.9%11.3%53
2025-09-0694.5%3.3%91
2025-09-1363.3%13.3%30
2025-09-200%0%1
2025-09-2765.5%10.9%55
2025-10-0435%50%20
2025-10-1154.5%9.1%11
2025-10-1866.7%0%18
2025-10-2591.9%5%160
2025-11-0171.4%11.4%35
2025-11-0868.8%0%16
2025-11-1555.2%13.8%29
2025-11-2281.3%0%16
2025-11-2937.5%12.5%16
2025-12-0685.7%0%7
2025-12-1359.5%7.1%42
2025-12-2090%0%10
2025-12-2780%0%5
2026-01-030%0%0
2026-01-1034.2%47.4%38
2026-01-1761.5%38.5%13

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.

Harm2.8 per 1,000 · 2
Personal Attacks 2
Identity-Based Abuse0 per 1,000 · 0
Explicit Language4.2 per 1,000 · 3
Explicit Acronym 1Explicit Words 2
College Sports12.7 per 1,000 · 9
Band 5NIL 1Student Section 2Recruiting 1
Off-Field Storylines15.5 per 1,000 · 11
Injuries 2Broadcast & Media 5Player Conduct 1Officiating 2Politics & Activism 1
Sports Betting4.2 per 1,000 · 3
Gambling 3
Team & Front Office98.9 per 1,000 · 70
Opponent Respect 3Coaching 49Stadium Experience 10Crowd & Attendance 7Opponent Hostility 1

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

Low volume

Too few comments to rank nationally.

3 explicit comments4.2 per 1,000
  • Explicit Words2
  • Explicit Acronym1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 4.2 of every 1,000 comments on this page, too little volume here for a national rank.

Moderation snapshot

Harm & identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments · by week
season avg 2.876.9 per 1,000 · no game that week (week of Jan 17)WLLLLWLWLWLW2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-230No game
2025-08-300W 21–17 vs Merrimack
2025-09-060L 14–62 at Texas Tech
2025-09-130L 28–31 vs Buffalo
2025-09-200L 10–66 at Florida State
2025-09-270No game
2025-10-040L 0–44 at Oklahoma
2025-10-110W 42–6 vs UMass
2025-10-180L 10–45 at Toledo
2025-10-250W 24–21 vs Bowling Green
2025-11-010L 13–17 at Ball State
2025-11-080W 42–35 (OT) at Akron
2025-11-150L 16–28 vs Central Michigan
2025-11-220W 35–31 at Northern Illinois
2025-11-290No game
2025-12-060No game
2025-12-130No game
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-270No game
2026-01-030No game
2026-01-1026.3No game
2026-01-1776.9No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 76.9 per 1,000 comments (no game that week (week of Jan 17)) against a season average of 2.8 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks2

Tag applications, which may overlap.

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

From the comment section

Whoever designed these “Fearless Flashes” did a great job! 😉

positiveFacebook

Thank you for clarifying! Love KSU. Go flashes!

positiveFacebook

Should have gone for someone not affiliated with Kenni Burns. Luke Fickell will be available after this season, could have gotten a former player, Brian Kelly, lots of coaches

negativeCoachingFacebook

It looks awesome but I'm going to miss the parquet floor though 😭😭

mixedStadium ExperienceFacebook
Behind the numbers

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