Liberty

Flames · 4–8 in 2025–26

Fan Score
600.6
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
4,767
2025–26 season
Positive share
60.1%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
15.7
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 Liberty fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out College Sports: 88th percentile · Harm: 17th percentile · Off-Field Storylines: 66th percentileLow volume (not ranked), omitted from the shape: Identity-Based Abuse, Explicit Language, Sports Betting.Percentile of ranked FBS teams per tag group; low-volume fanbases excluded from each cohort.
  • Liberty Harm: 17th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Liberty Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Liberty Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Liberty College Sports: 88th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Liberty Off-Field Storylines: 66th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Liberty Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Liberty Team & Front Office: 50th percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive60.1%2,863
Neutral7.3%346
Negative31.3%1,491
Mixed1.4%67

Signature subtags

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

College Sports
3.2×

Mentioned Transfer Portal at 3.2× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

12 per 1,000 comments
College Sports
2.9×

Mentioned Conference Realignment at 2.9× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

5.5 per 1,000 comments
Off-Field Storylines
2.4×

Mentioned Injuries at 2.4× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

14.7 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.

+100%+50%−50%−100%0%Peak: +95% · week of Dec 27Low: −17% · L 13–31 vs James MadisonAug 30: W 28–7 vs MaineWSep 6: L 24–34 at Jacksonville StateLSep 13: L 13–23 at Bowling GreenLSep 20: L 13–31 vs James MadisonLSep 27: L 7–21 at Old DominionLOct 8: W 19–8 at UTEPWOct 14: W 30–27 vs New Mexico StateWNov 1: W 59–30 vs DelawareWNov 8: L 17–21 vs Missouri StateLNov 15: L 27–34 (OT) at FIULNov 22: L 28–34 (OT) at Louisiana TechLNov 29: L 42–48 (2OT) vs Kennesaw StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+85%45053No game
2025-08-30+41%24391368W 28–7 vs Maine
2025-09-06+5%10089214L 24–34 at Jacksonville State
2025-09-13−17%121177327L 13–23 at Bowling Green
2025-09-20−17%126190367L 13–31 vs James Madison
2025-09-27−6%142162341L 7–21 at Old Dominion
2025-10-04+85%53337585W 19–8 at UTEP
2025-10-11+66%30857382W 30–27 vs New Mexico State
2025-10-18+58%36848No game
2025-10-25+42%321150No game
2025-11-01+80%14510169W 59–30 vs Delaware
2025-11-08+2%118113260L 17–21 vs Missouri State
2025-11-15+5%122110263L 27–34 (OT) at FIU
2025-11-22−13%203273542L 28–34 (OT) at Louisiana Tech
2025-11-29−5%94105208L 42–48 (2OT) vs Kennesaw State
2025-12-06+74%11215131No game
2025-12-13+89%87295No game
2025-12-20+91%21023No game
2025-12-27+95%20021No game
2026-01-03+69%14620182No game
2026-01-10+82%928103No game
2026-01-17+11%171335No game
Mood climbed for 5 straight weeks after the week they lost by 6 in OT at Louisiana Tech, gaining 108 points.

Season trend

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

PositiveNegative
0%48%95%Aug 30: W 28–7 vs MaineWSep 6: L 24–34 at Jacksonville StateLSep 13: L 13–23 at Bowling GreenLSep 20: L 13–31 vs James MadisonLSep 27: L 7–21 at Old DominionLOct 8: W 19–8 at UTEPWOct 14: W 30–27 vs New Mexico StateWNov 1: W 59–30 vs DelawareWNov 8: L 17–21 vs Missouri StateLNov 15: L 27–34 (OT) at FIULNov 22: L 28–34 (OT) at Louisiana TechLNov 29: L 42–48 (2OT) vs Kennesaw StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2384.9%0%53
2025-08-3066%24.7%368
2025-09-0646.7%41.6%214
2025-09-1337%54.1%327
2025-09-2034.3%51.8%367
2025-09-2741.6%47.5%341
2025-10-0491.1%6.3%585
2025-10-1180.6%14.9%382
2025-10-1875%16.7%48
2025-10-2564%22%50
2025-11-0185.8%5.9%169
2025-11-0845.4%43.5%260
2025-11-1546.4%41.8%263
2025-11-2237.5%50.4%542
2025-11-2945.2%50.5%208
2025-12-0685.5%11.5%131
2025-12-1391.6%2.1%95
2025-12-2091.3%0%23
2025-12-2795.2%0%21
2026-01-0380.2%11%182
2026-01-1089.3%7.8%103
2026-01-1748.6%37.1%35

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.

Harm11.7 per 1,000 · 56
Harm Wish 2Personal Attacks 45Group Hate 6Sexual Content 4
Identity-Based Abuse4 per 1,000 · 19
Gender 2Physical Appearance 6Race 3LGBTQIA+ 3Religion 4Disability 2
Explicit Language3.6 per 1,000 · 17
Explicit Words 7Explicit Acronym 3Violent Language 8
College Sports30.6 per 1,000 · 146
Conference Realignment 26Transfer Portal 57Recruiting 26NIL 43Student Section 6Band 8
Off-Field Storylines32.3 per 1,000 · 154
Broadcast & Media 45Injuries 70Officiating 32Politics & Activism 7
Sports Betting2.3 per 1,000 · 11
Gambling 9Prop Bet 2
Team & Front Office122.9 per 1,000 · 586
Opponent Hostility 27Coaching 465Front Office 28Athletic Department 8Stadium Experience 16Crowd & Attendance 42Opponent Respect 13

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

Low volume

Too few comments to rank nationally.

17 explicit comments3.6 per 1,000
  • Violent Language8
  • Explicit Words7
  • Explicit Acronym3

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 3.6 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 15.757.1 per 1,000 · no game that week (week of Jan 17)WLLLLWWWLLLL2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-230No game
2025-08-3010.9W 28–7 vs Maine
2025-09-0632.7L 24–34 at Jacksonville State
2025-09-1312.2L 13–23 at Bowling Green
2025-09-2032.7L 13–31 vs James Madison
2025-09-2714.7L 7–21 at Old Dominion
2025-10-0410.3W 19–8 at UTEP
2025-10-117.9W 30–27 vs New Mexico State
2025-10-180No game
2025-10-2520No game
2025-11-015.9W 59–30 vs Delaware
2025-11-087.7L 17–21 vs Missouri State
2025-11-1519L 27–34 (OT) at FIU
2025-11-2229.5L 28–34 (OT) at Louisiana Tech
2025-11-299.6L 42–48 (2OT) vs Kennesaw State
2025-12-0615.3No game
2025-12-130No game
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-270No game
2026-01-0311No game
2026-01-109.7No game
2026-01-1757.1No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 57.1 per 1,000 comments (no game that week (week of Jan 17)) against a season average of 15.7 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks45
  • Group Hate6
  • Sexual Content4
  • Harm Wish2
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Physical Appearance6
  • Religion4
  • LGBTQIA+3
  • Race3
  • Disability2
  • Gender2

Tag applications, which may overlap.

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

From the comment section

#54 is my favorite player! 🔥♥️Notice my last name is Grubbs! 😉

positiveFacebook

Welcome to the Flames family!

positiveFacebook

Hope the offense made the trip to New Mexico.

negativeFacebook

Poor utep qb........cant set up and pass with a weak offensive line....I bet his ears are still ringing....keep up the great play Flames

mixedOpponent HostilityFacebook
Behind the numbers

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