UTEP

Miners · 2–10 in 2025–26

Fan Score
498.8
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
5,198
2025–26 season
Positive share
49.9%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
22.7
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 UTEP fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out College Sports: 82nd percentile · Off-Field Storylines: 20th percentile · Explicit Language: 30th 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.
  • UTEP Harm: 42nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • UTEP Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • UTEP Explicit Language: 30th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • UTEP College Sports: 82nd percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • UTEP Off-Field Storylines: 20th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • UTEP Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • UTEP Team & Front Office: 53rd percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive49.9%2,593
Neutral8.2%426
Negative40%2,080
Mixed1.9%99

Signature subtags

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

College Sports
5.1×

Mentioned Conference Realignment at 5.1× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

9.6 per 1,000 comments
Team & Front Office
2.6×

Mentioned Crowd & Attendance at 2.6× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

25 per 1,000 comments
College Sports
1.6×

Mentioned Recruiting at 1.6× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

7.5 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.

+70%+35%−35%−70%0%Peak: +67% · week of Dec 27Low: −35% · L 8–19 vs LibertyAug 30: L 16–28 at Utah StateLSep 6: W 42–17 vs UT MartinWSep 13: L 10–27 at TexasLSep 20: L 25–31 vs UL MonroeLSep 27: L 11–30 vs Louisiana TechLOct 8: L 8–19 vs LibertyLOct 15: W 35–17 at Sam HoustonWOct 28: L 20–33 at Kennesaw StateLNov 8: L 27–30 vs Jacksonville StateLNov 15: L 24–38 at Missouri StateLNov 22: L 31–34 vs New Mexico StateLNov 29: L 31–61 at DelawareLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+62%701294No game
2025-08-30+23%192116330L 16–28 at Utah State
2025-09-06+65%31754405W 42–17 vs UT Martin
2025-09-13+58%468104631L 10–27 at Texas
2025-09-20−5%175195405L 25–31 vs UL Monroe
2025-09-27−13%123166329L 11–30 vs Louisiana Tech
2025-10-04−35%112247390L 8–19 vs Liberty
2025-10-11+41%24090366W 35–17 at Sam Houston
2025-10-18+42%21831No game
2025-10-25−18%99150290L 20–33 at Kennesaw State
2025-11-01+8%453892No game
2025-11-08+14%10677206L 27–30 vs Jacksonville State
2025-11-15+11%129102255L 24–38 at Missouri State
2025-11-22−26%128230397L 31–34 vs New Mexico State
2025-11-29−20%137213378L 31–61 at Delaware
2025-12-06−27%274877No game
2025-12-13−11%121157339No game
2025-12-20−10%121531No game
2025-12-27+67%406No game
2026-01-03+5%282563No game
2026-01-10+59%12217No game
2026-01-17−6%273166No game
Mood climbed for 3 straight weeks after the week of Dec 6, gaining 94 points.

Season trend

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

PositiveNegative
0%39%78%Aug 30: L 16–28 at Utah StateLSep 6: W 42–17 vs UT MartinWSep 13: L 10–27 at TexasLSep 20: L 25–31 vs UL MonroeLSep 27: L 11–30 vs Louisiana TechLOct 8: L 8–19 vs LibertyLOct 15: W 35–17 at Sam HoustonWOct 28: L 20–33 at Kennesaw StateLNov 8: L 27–30 vs Jacksonville StateLNov 15: L 24–38 at Missouri StateLNov 22: L 31–34 vs New Mexico StateLNov 29: L 31–61 at DelawareLAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2374.5%12.8%94
2025-08-3058.2%35.2%330
2025-09-0678.3%13.3%405
2025-09-1374.2%16.5%631
2025-09-2043.2%48.1%405
2025-09-2737.4%50.5%329
2025-10-0428.7%63.3%390
2025-10-1165.6%24.6%366
2025-10-1867.7%25.8%31
2025-10-2534.1%51.7%290
2025-11-0148.9%41.3%92
2025-11-0851.5%37.4%206
2025-11-1550.6%40%255
2025-11-2232.2%57.9%397
2025-11-2936.2%56.3%378
2025-12-0635.1%62.3%77
2025-12-1335.7%46.3%339
2025-12-2038.7%48.4%31
2025-12-2766.7%0%6
2026-01-0344.4%39.7%63
2026-01-1070.6%11.8%17
2026-01-1740.9%47%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.

Harm20.6 per 1,000 · 107
Personal Attacks 99Group Hate 6Sexual Content 2
Identity-Based Abuse2.1 per 1,000 · 11
Age 2Physical Appearance 2Gender 5Disability 2
Explicit Language11.4 per 1,000 · 59
Explicit Words 26Explicit Acronym 31Explicit Emoji 3Violent Language 1
College Sports26.4 per 1,000 · 137
NIL 21Recruiting 39Conference Realignment 50Band 7Transfer Portal 24Student Section 1
Off-Field Storylines19 per 1,000 · 99
Officiating 56Injuries 10Broadcast & Media 32Player Conduct 1
Sports Betting3.5 per 1,000 · 18
Gambling 15Moneyline 2Parlay 1
Team & Front Office126 per 1,000 · 655
Crowd & Attendance 130Stadium Experience 36Coaching 411Opponent Hostility 45Athletic Department 4Front Office 27Opponent Respect 17

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

30th percentile
59 explicit comments11.4 per 1,000
  • Explicit Acronym31
  • Explicit Words26
  • Explicit Emoji3
  • Violent Language1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 11.4 of every 1,000 comments on this page: 71st of 100 nationally, the 30th percentile.

Moderation snapshot

Harm & identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments · by week
season avg 22.763.8 per 1,000 · no game that week (week of Aug 23)LWLLLLWLLLLL2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-2363.8No game
2025-08-3036.4L 16–28 at Utah State
2025-09-067.4W 42–17 vs UT Martin
2025-09-1317.4L 10–27 at Texas
2025-09-2034.6L 25–31 vs UL Monroe
2025-09-2736.5L 11–30 vs Louisiana Tech
2025-10-0428.2L 8–19 vs Liberty
2025-10-1110.9W 35–17 at Sam Houston
2025-10-180No game
2025-10-2537.9L 20–33 at Kennesaw State
2025-11-0110.9No game
2025-11-0819.4L 27–30 vs Jacksonville State
2025-11-1539.2L 24–38 at Missouri State
2025-11-2222.7L 31–34 vs New Mexico State
2025-11-297.9L 31–61 at Delaware
2025-12-0626No game
2025-12-1311.8No game
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-270No game
2026-01-0315.9No game
2026-01-100No game
2026-01-170No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 63.8 per 1,000 comments (no game that week (week of Aug 23)) against a season average of 22.7 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks99
  • Group Hate6
  • Sexual Content2
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Gender5
  • Disability2
  • Age2
  • Physical Appearance2

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 to all. Can't wait for the season to start. 🏉🙏❤️🇺🇸

positiveFacebook

Bring some UTEP BASEBALL ⚾⚾⚾⚾ PLAY BALL 🌹⚾🌹⚾🌹

positiveFacebook

Salvador N. Alvarado since Palmer and Marrow they haven’t had anyone but Hernandez and Jones! The school use to have a decent program, these kids are bums

negativeFacebook

Great defense, got exhausted from being out so much! Come on offense, do something!!

mixedFacebook
Behind the numbers

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