Louisiana Tech

Bulldogs · 8–5 in 2025–26

Compare Louisiana Tech with…
Fan Score
662
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
4,799
2025–26 season
Positive share
66.2%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
26
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 Louisiana Tech fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out Off-Field Storylines: 70th percentile · Explicit Language: 42nd percentile · College Sports: 58th percentileLow volume (not ranked), omitted from the shape: Identity-Based Abuse, Sports Betting.Percentile of ranked FBS teams per tag group; low-volume fanbases excluded from each cohort.
  • Louisiana Tech Harm: 46th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Louisiana Tech Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Louisiana Tech Explicit Language: 42nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Louisiana Tech College Sports: 58th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Louisiana Tech Off-Field Storylines: 70th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Louisiana Tech Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Louisiana Tech Team & Front Office: 45th percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive66.2%3,177
Neutral8.2%393
Negative24.4%1,170
Mixed1.2%59

Signature subtags

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

College Sports
1.4×

Mentioned Recruiting at 1.4× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

6.5 per 1,000 comments
Off-Field Storylines
1.3×

Mentioned Officiating at 1.3× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

16.5 per 1,000 comments
Off-Field Storylines
1×

Mentioned Broadcast & Media at 1× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

12.1 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.

+100%+50%−50%−100%0%Peak: +100% · week of Jan 17Low: −25% · L 24–25 at DelawareAug 30: W 24–0 vs SE LouisianaWSep 6: L 7–23 at LSULSep 13: W 49–14 vs New Mexico StateWSep 20: W 30–20 vs Southern MissWSep 27: W 30–11 at UTEPWOct 9: L 7–35 at Kennesaw StateLOct 21: L 27–28 (OT) vs WKULOct 31: W 55–14 vs Sam HoustonWNov 8: L 24–25 at DelawareLNov 15: L 3–28 at Washington StateLNov 22: W 34–28 (OT) vs LibertyWNov 29: W 42–30 at Missouri StateWDec 30: W 23–14 vs Coastal CarolinaWAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+81%54462No game
2025-08-30+45%20066300W 24–0 vs SE Louisiana
2025-09-06+41%354134531L 7–23 at LSU
2025-09-13+85%1675190W 49–14 vs New Mexico State
2025-09-20+80%18410218W 30–20 vs Southern Miss
2025-09-27+90%2016216W 30–11 at UTEP
2025-10-04−18%78118222L 7–35 at Kennesaw State
2025-10-11+17%171135No game
2025-10-18−16%138199376L 27–28 (OT) vs WKU
2025-10-25+45%391162W 55–14 vs Sam Houston
2025-11-01+84%1329146No game
2025-11-08−25%115199335L 24–25 at Delaware
2025-11-15−2%111116244L 3–28 at Washington State
2025-11-22+58%30064404W 34–28 (OT) vs Liberty
2025-11-29+83%34415395W 42–30 at Missouri State
2025-12-06+60%8613121No game
2025-12-13+71%9212112No game
2025-12-20+77%67581No game
2025-12-27+40%439167675W 23–14 vs Coastal Carolina
2026-01-03+77%39347No game
2026-01-10+55%15322No game
2026-01-17+100%505No game
Fan mood fell 109 points the week they lost by 1 at Delaware.

Season trend

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

PositiveNegative
0%50%100%Aug 30: W 24–0 vs SE LouisianaWSep 6: L 7–23 at LSULSep 13: W 49–14 vs New Mexico StateWSep 20: W 30–20 vs Southern MissWSep 27: W 30–11 at UTEPWOct 9: L 7–35 at Kennesaw StateLOct 21: L 27–28 (OT) vs WKULOct 31: W 55–14 vs Sam HoustonWNov 8: L 24–25 at DelawareLNov 15: L 3–28 at Washington StateLNov 22: W 34–28 (OT) vs LibertyWNov 29: W 42–30 at Missouri StateWDec 30: W 23–14 vs Coastal CarolinaWAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2387.1%6.5%62
2025-08-3066.7%22%300
2025-09-0666.7%25.2%531
2025-09-1387.9%2.6%190
2025-09-2084.4%4.6%218
2025-09-2793.1%2.8%216
2025-10-0435.1%53.2%222
2025-10-1148.6%31.4%35
2025-10-1836.7%52.9%376
2025-10-2562.9%17.7%62
2025-11-0190.4%6.2%146
2025-11-0834.3%59.4%335
2025-11-1545.5%47.5%244
2025-11-2274.3%15.8%404
2025-11-2987.1%3.8%395
2025-12-0671.1%10.7%121
2025-12-1382.1%10.7%112
2025-12-2082.7%6.2%81
2025-12-2765%24.7%675
2026-01-0383%6.4%47
2026-01-1068.2%13.6%22
2026-01-17100%0%5

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.

Harm23.1 per 1,000 · 111
Personal Attacks 106Harm Wish 3Group Hate 2Sexual Content 1
Identity-Based Abuse2.9 per 1,000 · 14
Physical Appearance 6Gender 3Race 1Disability 3Age 1
Explicit Language15.8 per 1,000 · 76
Explicit Words 66Explicit Acronym 8Explicit Emoji 1Violent Language 1
College Sports17.7 per 1,000 · 85
Transfer Portal 17Recruiting 31NIL 16Conference Realignment 14Student Section 3Band 8
Off-Field Storylines33.1 per 1,000 · 159
Broadcast & Media 58Officiating 79Injuries 23
Sports Betting2.7 per 1,000 · 13
Gambling 11Parlay 1Moneyline 1
Team & Front Office120.2 per 1,000 · 577
Front Office 15Coaching 438Opponent Hostility 48Crowd & Attendance 44Opponent Respect 20Athletic Department 4Stadium Experience 22

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

42nd percentile
76 explicit comments15.8 per 1,000
  • Explicit Words66
  • Explicit Acronym8
  • Explicit Emoji1
  • Violent Language1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 15.8 of every 1,000 comments on this page: 59th of 100 nationally, the 42nd percentile.

Moderation snapshot

Harm & identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments · by week
season avg 2699.1 per 1,000 · L 7–35 at Kennesaw StateWLWWWLLWLLWWW2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-230No game
2025-08-3040W 24–0 vs SE Louisiana
2025-09-0624.5L 7–23 at LSU
2025-09-130W 49–14 vs New Mexico State
2025-09-204.6W 30–20 vs Southern Miss
2025-09-274.6W 30–11 at UTEP
2025-10-0499.1L 7–35 at Kennesaw State
2025-10-110No game
2025-10-1866.5L 27–28 (OT) vs WKU
2025-10-2532.3W 55–14 vs Sam Houston
2025-11-010No game
2025-11-0859.7L 24–25 at Delaware
2025-11-1512.3L 3–28 at Washington State
2025-11-227.4W 34–28 (OT) vs Liberty
2025-11-295.1W 42–30 at Missouri State
2025-12-060No game
2025-12-138.9No game
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-2729.6W 23–14 vs Coastal Carolina
2026-01-030No game
2026-01-100No game
2026-01-170No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 99.1 per 1,000 comments (L 7–35 at Kennesaw State) against a season average of 26 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks106
  • Harm Wish3
  • Group Hate2
  • Sexual Content1
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Physical Appearance6
  • Disability3
  • Gender3
  • Age1
  • Race1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

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

From the comment section

Congratulations Jessie!❤️💙

positiveFacebook

Welcome & congratulations 🎉🎊

positiveFacebook

Disgusting i just lost 11 game parlay on this disaster

negativeParlayFacebook

We missed 2 FGs in the 1st half and Baker went out...😶 It is what it is..🤷🏾‍♀️ Go Dawgs!

mixedFacebook
Behind the numbers

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