Tulsa

Golden Hurricane · 4–8 in 2025–26

Fan Score
839
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
2,677
2025–26 season
Positive share
83.9%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
7.1
harm + identity abuse per 1,000 · lower is better
Low volume, not ranked
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 Tulsa fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out Team & Front Office: 3rd percentile · Off-Field Storylines: 11th percentile · College Sports: 49th percentileLow volume (not ranked), omitted from the shape: Harm, Identity-Based Abuse, Explicit Language, Sports Betting.Percentile of ranked FBS teams per tag group; low-volume fanbases excluded from each cohort.
  • Tulsa Harm: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa Explicit Language: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa College Sports: 49th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Tulsa Off-Field Storylines: 11th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Tulsa Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Tulsa Team & Front Office: 3rd percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive83.9%2,246
Neutral7.7%205
Negative7.7%207
Mixed0.7%19

Signature subtags

What Tulsa 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.

6.7 per 1,000 comments
Team & Front Office
1.1×

Mentioned Stadium Experience at 1.1× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

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

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

12 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 Dec 20Low: +46% · L 14–31 vs TulaneAug 30: W 35–7 vs Abilene ChrstnWSep 6: L 14–21 at New Mexico StateLSep 13: L 23–42 vs NavyLSep 19: W 19–12 at Oklahoma StateWSep 27: L 14–31 vs TulaneLOct 4: L 7–45 at MemphisLOct 16: L 27–41 at East CarolinaLOct 25: L 37–38 (OT) vs TempleLNov 8: L 21–40 at Florida AtlanticLNov 15: W 31–14 vs Oregon StateWNov 22: W 26–25 at ArmyWNov 29: L 24–31 vs UABLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+63%28340No game
2025-08-30+89%1813201W 35–7 vs Abilene Chrstn
2025-09-06+64%11121140L 14–21 at New Mexico State
2025-09-13+58%10122136L 23–42 vs Navy; W 19–12 at Oklahoma State
2025-09-20+75%28132331No game
2025-09-27+46%441368L 14–31 vs Tulane
2025-10-04+61%681390L 7–45 at Memphis
2025-10-11+79%82894L 27–41 at East Carolina
2025-10-18+80%47355No game
2025-10-25+73%39448L 37–38 (OT) vs Temple
2025-11-01+86%43149No game
2025-11-08+53%551380L 21–40 at Florida Atlantic
2025-11-15+95%1833190W 31–14 vs Oregon State
2025-11-22+85%39622439W 26–25 at Army
2025-11-29+73%16116199L 24–31 vs UAB
2025-12-06+95%19020No game
2025-12-13+95%36038No game
2025-12-20+100%20020No game
2025-12-27+50%7918123No game
2026-01-03+76%1299158No game
2026-01-10+91%84092No game
2026-01-17+85%59366No game
Fan mood fell 50 points the week of Dec 27.

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 35–7 vs Abilene ChrstnWSep 6: L 14–21 at New Mexico StateLSep 13: L 23–42 vs NavyLSep 19: W 19–12 at Oklahoma StateWSep 27: L 14–31 vs TulaneLOct 4: L 7–45 at MemphisLOct 16: L 27–41 at East CarolinaLOct 25: L 37–38 (OT) vs TempleLNov 8: L 21–40 at Florida AtlanticLNov 15: W 31–14 vs Oregon StateWNov 22: W 26–25 at ArmyWNov 29: L 24–31 vs UABLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2370%7.5%40
2025-08-3090%1.5%201
2025-09-0679.3%15%140
2025-09-1374.3%16.2%136
2025-09-2084.9%9.7%331
2025-09-2764.7%19.1%68
2025-10-0475.6%14.4%90
2025-10-1187.2%8.5%94
2025-10-1885.5%5.5%55
2025-10-2581.3%8.3%48
2025-11-0187.8%2%49
2025-11-0868.8%16.3%80
2025-11-1596.3%1.6%190
2025-11-2290.2%5%439
2025-11-2980.9%8%199
2025-12-0695%0%20
2025-12-1394.7%0%38
2025-12-20100%0%20
2025-12-2764.2%14.6%123
2026-01-0381.6%5.7%158
2026-01-1091.3%0%92
2026-01-1789.4%4.5%66

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.

Harm6.4 per 1,000 · 17
Group Hate 1Personal Attacks 15Harm Wish 1
Identity-Based Abuse0.7 per 1,000 · 2
Gender 2
Explicit Language8.2 per 1,000 · 22
Explicit Acronym 3Explicit Words 17Violent Language 2Explicit Emoji 1
College Sports15.7 per 1,000 · 42
Transfer Portal 13Recruiting 18NIL 12
Off-Field Storylines15.7 per 1,000 · 42
Broadcast & Media 32Injuries 7Officiating 2Player Conduct 1
Sports Betting0 per 1,000 · 0
Team & Front Office64.3 per 1,000 · 172
Coaching 105Opponent Hostility 28Opponent Respect 12Crowd & Attendance 12Stadium Experience 15Front Office 3

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

Low volume

Too few comments to rank nationally.

22 explicit comments8.2 per 1,000
  • Explicit Words17
  • Explicit Acronym3
  • Violent Language2
  • Explicit Emoji1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 8.2 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 7.128.6 per 1,000 · L 14–21 at New Mexico StateWLLWLLLLLWWL2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-230No game
2025-08-300W 35–7 vs Abilene Chrstn
2025-09-0628.6L 14–21 at New Mexico State
2025-09-137.4L 23–42 vs Navy; W 19–12 at Oklahoma State
2025-09-2012.1No game
2025-09-270L 14–31 vs Tulane
2025-10-040L 7–45 at Memphis
2025-10-110L 27–41 at East Carolina
2025-10-180No game
2025-10-250L 37–38 (OT) vs Temple
2025-11-010No game
2025-11-080L 21–40 at Florida Atlantic
2025-11-150W 31–14 vs Oregon State
2025-11-224.6W 26–25 at Army
2025-11-295L 24–31 vs UAB
2025-12-060No game
2025-12-130No game
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-2724.4No game
2026-01-0319No game
2026-01-100No game
2026-01-1715.2No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 28.6 per 1,000 comments (L 14–21 at New Mexico State) against a season average of 7.1 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks15
  • Group Hate1
  • Harm Wish1
Identity-Based Abuse
  • 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

Congratulations!! #ReignCane🌀

positiveFacebook

What a gift Grant is , that young man is going places !

positiveFacebook

Why can’t TU hire a good coach anymore?

negativeCoachingFacebook

ECU fan here. Glad you won! You guys look like us. Get too conservative... Play to lose

mixedOpponent RespectFacebook
Behind the numbers

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