Missouri State

Bears · 7–6 in 2025–26

Compare Missouri State with…
Fan Score
782.6
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
2,144
2025–26 season
Positive share
78.3%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
16.3
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 Missouri State fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out Harm: 19th percentile · Off-Field Storylines: 81st percentile · Team & Front Office: 22nd 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.
  • Missouri State Harm: 19th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Missouri State Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Missouri State Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Missouri State College Sports: 67th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Missouri State Off-Field Storylines: 81st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Missouri State Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Missouri State Team & Front Office: 22nd percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive78.3%1,678
Neutral8.1%173
Negative12.2%261
Mixed1.5%32

Signature subtags

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

Off-Field Storylines
2×

Mentioned Broadcast & Media at 2× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

22.9 per 1,000 comments
Team & Front Office
1.8×

Mentioned Stadium Experience at 1.8× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

8.9 per 1,000 comments
Team & Front Office
1.6×

Mentioned Crowd & Attendance at 1.6× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

15.9 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 10Low: +10% · week of Dec 6Aug 30: L 13–73 at USCLSep 6: W 21–20 at MarshallWSep 13: L 10–28 vs SMULSep 20: W 42–10 vs UT MartinWSep 27: L 22–27 vs WKULOct 8: W 22–20 at Middle TennesseeWOct 22: W 24–17 (OT) at New Mexico StateWOct 29: W 28–21 vs FIUWNov 8: W 21–17 at LibertyWNov 15: W 38–24 vs UTEPWNov 22: L 34–41 at Kennesaw StateLNov 29: L 30–42 vs Louisiana TechLDec 18: L 28–34 vs Arkansas StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+76%43451No game
2025-08-30+57%721698L 13–73 at USC
2025-09-06+76%18317218W 21–20 at Marshall
2025-09-13+46%591791L 10–28 vs SMU
2025-09-20+71%50662W 42–10 vs UT Martin
2025-09-27+66%44756L 22–27 vs WKU
2025-10-04+76%11610139W 22–20 at Middle Tennessee
2025-10-11+50%11316No game
2025-10-18+55%541374W 24–17 (OT) at New Mexico State
2025-10-25+83%1227139W 28–21 vs FIU
2025-11-01+77%37344No game
2025-11-08+79%18416213W 21–17 at Liberty
2025-11-15+89%82488W 38–24 vs UTEP
2025-11-22+49%451268L 34–41 at Kennesaw State
2025-11-29+67%26940344L 30–42 vs Louisiana Tech
2025-12-06+10%5846125No game
2025-12-13+59%11822162L 28–34 vs Arkansas State
2025-12-20+79%30334No game
2025-12-27+50%314No game
2026-01-03+54%541474No game
2026-01-10+100%19019No game
2026-01-17+100%25025No game
Fan mood fell 57 points the week of Dec 6.

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: L 13–73 at USCLSep 6: W 21–20 at MarshallWSep 13: L 10–28 vs SMULSep 20: W 42–10 vs UT MartinWSep 27: L 22–27 vs WKULOct 8: W 22–20 at Middle TennesseeWOct 22: W 24–17 (OT) at New Mexico StateWOct 29: W 28–21 vs FIUWNov 8: W 21–17 at LibertyWNov 15: W 38–24 vs UTEPWNov 22: L 34–41 at Kennesaw StateLNov 29: L 30–42 vs Louisiana TechLDec 18: L 28–34 vs Arkansas StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2384.3%7.8%51
2025-08-3073.5%16.3%98
2025-09-0683.9%7.8%218
2025-09-1364.8%18.7%91
2025-09-2080.6%9.7%62
2025-09-2778.6%12.5%56
2025-10-0483.5%7.2%139
2025-10-1168.8%18.8%16
2025-10-1873%17.6%74
2025-10-2587.8%5%139
2025-11-0184.1%6.8%44
2025-11-0886.4%7.5%213
2025-11-1593.2%4.5%88
2025-11-2266.2%17.6%68
2025-11-2978.2%11.6%344
2025-12-0646.4%36.8%125
2025-12-1372.8%13.6%162
2025-12-2088.2%8.8%34
2025-12-2775%25%4
2026-01-0373%18.9%74
2026-01-10100%0%19
2026-01-17100%0%25

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.

Harm13.1 per 1,000 · 28
Group Hate 8Harm Wish 3Death Threat 1Personal Attacks 18Violent Threat 2
Identity-Based Abuse3.3 per 1,000 · 7
Gender 1LGBTQIA+ 1Race 4Age 1
Explicit Language4.2 per 1,000 · 9
Violent Language 1Explicit Words 2Explicit Acronym 6
College Sports20.1 per 1,000 · 43
Recruiting 16Band 10NIL 7Transfer Portal 4Student Section 4Conference Realignment 5
Off-Field Storylines37.3 per 1,000 · 80
Broadcast & Media 49Officiating 23Injuries 8
Sports Betting1.4 per 1,000 · 3
Gambling 3
Team & Front Office96.5 per 1,000 · 207
Crowd & Attendance 34Coaching 136Opponent Hostility 6Stadium Experience 19Opponent Respect 4Athletic Department 4Front Office 7

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

Low volume

Too few comments to rank nationally.

9 explicit comments4.2 per 1,000
  • Explicit Acronym6
  • Explicit Words2
  • Violent Language1

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 16.364.5 per 1,000 · W 42–10 vs UT MartinLWLWLWWWWWLLL2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-2339.2No game
2025-08-3010.2L 13–73 at USC
2025-09-064.6W 21–20 at Marshall
2025-09-1344L 10–28 vs SMU
2025-09-2064.5W 42–10 vs UT Martin
2025-09-2717.9L 22–27 vs WKU
2025-10-0443.2W 22–20 at Middle Tennessee
2025-10-110No game
2025-10-1840.5W 24–17 (OT) at New Mexico State
2025-10-250W 28–21 vs FIU
2025-11-0122.7No game
2025-11-084.7W 21–17 at Liberty
2025-11-150W 38–24 vs UTEP
2025-11-2214.7L 34–41 at Kennesaw State
2025-11-2926.2L 30–42 vs Louisiana Tech
2025-12-060No game
2025-12-136.2L 28–34 vs Arkansas State
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-270No game
2026-01-030No game
2026-01-100No game
2026-01-170No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 64.5 per 1,000 comments (W 42–10 vs UT Martin) against a season average of 16.3 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks18
  • Group Hate8
  • Harm Wish3
  • Violent Threat2
  • Death Threat1
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Race4
  • Age1
  • Gender1
  • LGBTQIA+1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

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

From the comment section

Hope they don't give up a 100 😂

positiveFacebook

Incredibly impressive work from the new staff in such a short time

positiveCoachingFacebook

Fake fg was the dumbest call of the year

negativeCoachingFacebook

Great win. I hate Liberty U so much

mixedOpponent HostilityFacebook
Behind the numbers

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