North Carolina

Tar Heels · 4–8 in 2025–26

Compare North Carolina with…
Fan Score
381.7
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
8,668
2025–26 season
Positive share
38.2%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
94.6
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 North Carolina fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out Harm: 100th percentile · Identity-Based Abuse: 100th percentile · Explicit Language: 92nd percentileLow volume (not ranked), omitted from the shape: Sports Betting.Percentile of ranked FBS teams per tag group; low-volume fanbases excluded from each cohort.
  • North Carolina Harm: 100th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • North Carolina Identity-Based Abuse: 100th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • North Carolina Explicit Language: 92nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • North Carolina College Sports: 64th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • North Carolina Off-Field Storylines: 40th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • North Carolina Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • North Carolina Team & Front Office: 85th percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive38.2%3,309
Neutral8.5%734
Negative51.5%4,464
Mixed1.9%161

Signature subtags

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

Identity-Based Abuse
6.8×

Mentioned Age at 6.8× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

6.1 per 1,000 comments
Identity-Based Abuse
4.6×

Mentioned LGBTQIA+ at 4.6× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

3.2 per 1,000 comments
Off-Field Storylines
2.8×

Mentioned Player Conduct at 2.8× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

1.7 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.

+80%+40%−40%−80%0%Peak: +75% · week of Dec 20Low: −48% · L 9–34 at UCFSep 1: L 14–48 vs TCULSep 6: W 20–3 at CharlotteWSep 13: W 41–6 vs RichmondWSep 20: L 9–34 at UCFLOct 4: L 10–38 vs ClemsonLOct 17: L 18–21 at CaliforniaLOct 25: L 16–17 (OT) vs VirginiaLOct 31: W 27–10 at SyracuseWNov 8: W 20–15 vs StanfordWNov 15: L 12–28 at Wake ForestLNov 22: L 25–32 vs DukeLNov 29: L 19–42 at NC StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+31%10651180No game
2025-08-30−2%282294659L 14–48 vs TCU
2025-09-06+2%203192462W 20–3 at Charlotte
2025-09-13+15%229163439W 41–6 vs Richmond
2025-09-20−48%196630908L 9–34 at UCF
2025-09-27+22%8148147No game
2025-10-04−38%188467740L 10–38 vs Clemson
2025-10-11−7%108127260L 18–21 at California
2025-10-18−36%188433679No game
2025-10-25−5%242269561L 16–17 (OT) vs Virginia; W 27–10 at Syracuse
2025-11-01+23%433258761No game
2025-11-08+24%286161514W 20–15 vs Stanford
2025-11-15−32%154323527L 12–28 at Wake Forest
2025-11-22−30%213423694L 25–32 vs Duke
2025-11-29−41%171447670L 19–42 at NC State
2025-12-06−28%91729No game
2025-12-13+5%383484No game
2025-12-20+75%24328No game
2025-12-27+15%141026No game
2026-01-03+5%474299No game
2026-01-10+19%6240116No game
2026-01-17+4%353285No game
Mood climbed for 3 straight weeks after the week they lost by 23 at NC State, gaining 116 points.

Season trend

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

PositiveNegative
0%43%86%Sep 1: L 14–48 vs TCULSep 6: W 20–3 at CharlotteWSep 13: W 41–6 vs RichmondWSep 20: L 9–34 at UCFLOct 4: L 10–38 vs ClemsonLOct 17: L 18–21 at CaliforniaLOct 25: L 16–17 (OT) vs VirginiaLOct 31: W 27–10 at SyracuseWNov 8: W 20–15 vs StanfordWNov 15: L 12–28 at Wake ForestLNov 22: L 25–32 vs DukeLNov 29: L 19–42 at NC StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2358.9%28.3%180
2025-08-3042.8%44.6%659
2025-09-0643.9%41.6%462
2025-09-1352.2%37.1%439
2025-09-2021.6%69.4%908
2025-09-2755.1%32.7%147
2025-10-0425.4%63.1%740
2025-10-1141.5%48.8%260
2025-10-1827.7%63.8%679
2025-10-2543.1%48%561
2025-11-0156.9%33.9%761
2025-11-0855.6%31.3%514
2025-11-1529.2%61.3%527
2025-11-2230.7%61%694
2025-11-2925.5%66.7%670
2025-12-0631%58.6%29
2025-12-1345.2%40.5%84
2025-12-2085.7%10.7%28
2025-12-2753.8%38.5%26
2026-01-0347.5%42.4%99
2026-01-1053.4%34.5%116
2026-01-1741.2%37.6%85

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.

Harm74.9 per 1,000 · 649
Personal Attacks 618Group Hate 16Sexual Content 32Harm Wish 4
Identity-Based Abuse19.7 per 1,000 · 171
Age 53Physical Appearance 45LGBTQIA+ 28Gender 35Race 9Disability 14
Explicit Language42.6 per 1,000 · 369
Explicit Words 316Explicit Acronym 53Violent Language 4Explicit Emoji 5
College Sports19.6 per 1,000 · 170
Transfer Portal 58Conference Realignment 8Recruiting 54NIL 50Student Section 2Band 2
Off-Field Storylines26.2 per 1,000 · 227
Player Conduct 15Broadcast & Media 103Officiating 74Injuries 26Politics & Activism 9
Sports Betting2.3 per 1,000 · 20
Gambling 19Prop Bet 1
Team & Front Office180 per 1,000 · 1,560
Opponent Respect 32Coaching 1,186Opponent Hostility 234Crowd & Attendance 65Front Office 54Athletic Department 11Stadium Experience 24

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

92nd percentile
369 explicit comments42.6 per 1,000
  • Explicit Words316
  • Explicit Acronym53
  • Explicit Emoji5
  • Violent Language4

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 42.6 of every 1,000 comments on this page: 9th of 100 nationally, the 92nd percentile.

Moderation snapshot

Harm & identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments · by week
season avg 94.6241.4 per 1,000 · no game that week (week of Dec 6)LWWLLLLWWLLL2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-2372.2No game
2025-08-3062.2L 14–48 vs TCU
2025-09-0660.6W 20–3 at Charlotte
2025-09-1377.4W 41–6 vs Richmond
2025-09-20104.6L 9–34 at UCF
2025-09-2768No game
2025-10-0489.2L 10–38 vs Clemson
2025-10-11119.2L 18–21 at California
2025-10-18110.5No game
2025-10-2596.3L 16–17 (OT) vs Virginia; W 27–10 at Syracuse
2025-11-0186.7No game
2025-11-08110.9W 20–15 vs Stanford
2025-11-15123.3L 12–28 at Wake Forest
2025-11-22109.5L 25–32 vs Duke
2025-11-2998.5L 19–42 at NC State
2025-12-06241.4No game
2025-12-13142.9No game
2025-12-2035.7No game
2025-12-2738.5No game
2026-01-0360.6No game
2026-01-1086.2No game
2026-01-1770.6No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 241.4 per 1,000 comments (no game that week (week of Dec 6)) against a season average of 94.6 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks618
  • Sexual Content32
  • Group Hate16
  • Harm Wish4
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Age53
  • Physical Appearance45
  • Gender35
  • LGBTQIA+28
  • Disability14
  • Race9

Tag applications, which may overlap.

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

From the comment section

Bobby Gurley. We’ll be to your left. Section 124. GO HEELS!

positiveStadium ExperienceFacebook

good luck.Haters will hate.

positiveFacebook

Looks like fumbled on first play and fumbled on last play

negativeFacebook

Mistakes again hold on to the ball is one of the first thing you learn as a running back and receiver but great try

mixedFacebook
Behind the numbers

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