Rutgers

Scarlet Knights · 5–7 in 2025–26

Fan Score
508.6
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
5,649
2025–26 season
Positive share
50.9%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
34.7
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 Rutgers fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out College Sports: 87th percentile · Sports Betting: 87th percentile · Identity-Based Abuse: 21st percentilePercentile of ranked FBS teams per tag group; low-volume fanbases excluded from each cohort.
  • Rutgers Harm: 61st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Identity-Based Abuse: 21st percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Explicit Language: 37th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers College Sports: 87th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Off-Field Storylines: 53rd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Sports Betting: 87th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Rutgers Team & Front Office: 32nd percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive50.9%2,873
Neutral9.3%524
Negative37.5%2,116
Mixed2.4%136

Signature subtags

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

College Sports
5.6×

Mentioned Conference Realignment at 5.6× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

10.6 per 1,000 comments
College Sports
2.3×

Mentioned NIL at 2.3× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

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

Mentioned Stadium Experience at 1.6× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

7.8 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: +71% · L 19–38 at WashingtonLow: −33% · week of Dec 27Aug 28: W 34–31 vs OhioWSep 6: W 45–17 vs Miami (Ohio)WSep 13: W 60–10 vs Norfolk StWSep 19: L 28–38 vs IowaLSep 27: L 28–31 at MinnesotaLOct 10: L 19–38 at WashingtonLOct 18: L 10–56 vs OregonLOct 25: W 27–24 at PurdueWNov 1: L 13–35 at IllinoisLNov 8: W 35–20 vs MarylandWNov 22: L 9–42 at Ohio StateLNov 29: L 36–40 vs Penn StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+14%250180507W 34–31 vs Ohio
2025-08-30+15%453284No game
2025-09-06+40%25593401W 45–17 vs Miami (Ohio)
2025-09-13+23%293168545W 60–10 vs Norfolk St; L 28–38 vs Iowa
2025-09-20−17%169249467No game
2025-09-27−23%151252445L 28–31 at Minnesota
2025-10-04+71%73990L 19–38 at Washington
2025-10-11−33%45100166No game
2025-10-18−9%7491188L 10–56 vs Oregon
2025-10-25+40%356136552W 27–24 at Purdue
2025-11-01+20%7648138L 13–35 at Illinois
2025-11-08+35%474210751W 35–20 vs Maryland
2025-11-15+53%19349273No game
2025-11-22−18%5787164L 9–42 at Ohio State
2025-11-29−19%246379711L 36–40 vs Penn State
2025-12-06+45%20729No game
2025-12-13+50%204No game
2025-12-20+33%213No game
2025-12-27−33%136No game
2026-01-03+52%20627No game
2026-01-10+70%18223No game
2026-01-17+52%531475No game
Fan mood fell 104 points the week of Oct 11.

Season trend

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

PositiveNegative
0%41%81%Aug 28: W 34–31 vs OhioWSep 6: W 45–17 vs Miami (Ohio)WSep 13: W 60–10 vs Norfolk StWSep 19: L 28–38 vs IowaLSep 27: L 28–31 at MinnesotaLOct 10: L 19–38 at WashingtonLOct 18: L 10–56 vs OregonLOct 25: W 27–24 at PurdueWNov 1: L 13–35 at IllinoisLNov 8: W 35–20 vs MarylandWNov 22: L 9–42 at Ohio StateLNov 29: L 36–40 vs Penn StateLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2349.3%35.5%507
2025-08-3053.6%38.1%84
2025-09-0663.6%23.2%401
2025-09-1353.8%30.8%545
2025-09-2036.2%53.3%467
2025-09-2733.9%56.6%445
2025-10-0481.1%10%90
2025-10-1127.1%60.2%166
2025-10-1839.4%48.4%188
2025-10-2564.5%24.6%552
2025-11-0155.1%34.8%138
2025-11-0863.1%28%751
2025-11-1570.7%17.9%273
2025-11-2234.8%53%164
2025-11-2934.6%53.3%711
2025-12-0669%24.1%29
2025-12-1350%0%4
2025-12-2066.7%33.3%3
2025-12-2716.7%50%6
2026-01-0374.1%22.2%27
2026-01-1078.3%8.7%23
2026-01-1770.7%18.7%75

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.

Harm29.9 per 1,000 · 169
Personal Attacks 158Group Hate 9Sexual Content 1Harm Wish 3
Identity-Based Abuse4.8 per 1,000 · 27
Gender 6Race 4LGBTQIA+ 5Physical Appearance 6Disability 6Age 1
Explicit Language13.6 per 1,000 · 77
Explicit Words 57Explicit Acronym 16Explicit Emoji 2Violent Language 3
College Sports29 per 1,000 · 164
NIL 50Conference Realignment 60Student Section 8Recruiting 27Band 12Transfer Portal 14
Off-Field Storylines29.7 per 1,000 · 168
Officiating 70Injuries 38Broadcast & Media 55Politics & Activism 5Player Conduct 1
Sports Betting5.1 per 1,000 · 29
Gambling 23Prop Bet 5Parlay 1Moneyline 1
Team & Front Office107.6 per 1,000 · 608
Opponent Hostility 94Crowd & Attendance 50Front Office 15Coaching 365Opponent Respect 53Stadium Experience 44Athletic Department 2

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

37th percentile
77 explicit comments13.6 per 1,000
  • Explicit Words57
  • Explicit Acronym16
  • Violent Language3
  • Explicit Emoji2

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 13.6 of every 1,000 comments on this page: 64th of 100 nationally, the 37th percentile.

Moderation snapshot

Harm & identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments · by week
season avg 34.778.3 per 1,000 · no game that week (week of Oct 11)WWWLLLLWLWLL2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-2321.7W 34–31 vs Ohio
2025-08-3047.6No game
2025-09-0620W 45–17 vs Miami (Ohio)
2025-09-1327.5W 60–10 vs Norfolk St; L 28–38 vs Iowa
2025-09-2047.1No game
2025-09-2731.5L 28–31 at Minnesota
2025-10-040L 19–38 at Washington
2025-10-1178.3No game
2025-10-1853.2L 10–56 vs Oregon
2025-10-2534.4W 27–24 at Purdue
2025-11-0114.5L 13–35 at Illinois
2025-11-0836W 35–20 vs Maryland
2025-11-1529.3No game
2025-11-2248.8L 9–42 at Ohio State
2025-11-2946.4L 36–40 vs Penn State
2025-12-0634.5No game
2025-12-130No game
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-270No game
2026-01-0337No game
2026-01-100No game
2026-01-170No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 78.3 per 1,000 comments (no game that week (week of Oct 11)) against a season average of 34.7 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks158
  • Group Hate9
  • Harm Wish3
  • Sexual Content1
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Disability6
  • Gender6
  • Physical Appearance6
  • LGBTQIA+5
  • Race4
  • Age1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

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

From the comment section

“ The Most Wonderful Time Of The Year!!”

positiveFacebook

So sad the Bears lost. He was giving me a team to root for! Rutgers ❤️🖤

positiveFacebook

Chop didn't get the job done!!!!!

negativeFacebook

I just hate to read these negative/hurtful comments!! These guys are working every single day trying to get better and win. Also hoping that their fans support them. Shame on you!!!!😡😡😡😡

mixedFacebook
Behind the numbers

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