Western Michigan

Broncos · 10–4 in 2025–26

Compare Western Michigan with…
Fan Score
765.4
positive per 1,000 comments
Comments analyzed
4,607
2025–26 season
Positive share
76.5%
of all fan comments
Toxicity
9.1
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 Western Michigan fans raise more than anyone else.

Comment-section fingerprint

Stands out Harm: 4th percentile · Off-Field Storylines: 4th percentile · Team & Front Office: 17th 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.
  • Western Michigan Harm: 4th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Western Michigan Identity-Based Abuse: low volume, not ranked
  • Western Michigan Explicit Language: 20th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Western Michigan College Sports: 29th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Western Michigan Off-Field Storylines: 4th percentile of ranked FBS teams
  • Western Michigan Sports Betting: low volume, not ranked
  • Western Michigan Team & Front Office: 17th percentile of ranked FBS teams

Sentiment

Positive76.5%3,526
Neutral7.2%330
Negative15.1%697
Mixed1.2%54

Signature subtags

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

Sports Betting
1.4×

Mentioned Gambling at 1.4× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

3.7 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
Team & Front Office
1×

Mentioned Crowd & Attendance at 1× the rate of the average classified fanbase.

10 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: +92% · week of Dec 20Low: −35% · L 30–33 (OT) vs North TexasAug 29: L 6–23 at Michigan StateLSep 6: L 30–33 (OT) vs North TexasLSep 13: L 0–38 at IllinoisLSep 20: W 14–13 vs ToledoWSep 27: W 47–14 vs Rhode IslandWOct 4: W 21–3 at UMassWOct 11: W 42–0 vs Ball StateWOct 25: L 17–26 at Miami (Ohio)LNov 1: W 24–21 vs Central MichiganWNov 11: W 17–13 vs OhioWNov 18: W 35–19 at Northern IllinoisWNov 25: W 31–21 at Eastern MichiganWDec 6: W 23–13 vs Miami (Ohio)WDec 19: W 41–6 vs Kennesaw StateWAug 23Jan 17
Weekly net fan mood with positive, negative, and total comment counts
Week ofNet moodPositiveNegativeCommentsGames
2025-08-23+77%13715159L 6–23 at Michigan State
2025-08-30−4%104115250No game
2025-09-06−35%81191317L 30–33 (OT) vs North Texas
2025-09-13+1%8179188L 0–38 at Illinois
2025-09-20+70%24631305W 14–13 vs Toledo
2025-09-27+76%11612137W 47–14 vs Rhode Island
2025-10-04+73%66781W 21–3 at UMass
2025-10-11+84%1033119W 42–0 vs Ball State
2025-10-18+74%41450No game
2025-10-25+6%6153126L 17–26 at Miami (Ohio)
2025-11-01+74%19824236W 24–21 vs Central Michigan
2025-11-08+65%27043348W 17–13 vs Ohio
2025-11-15+71%25230311W 35–19 at Northern Illinois
2025-11-22+78%34731406W 31–21 at Eastern Michigan
2025-11-29+88%32212351No game
2025-12-06+90%2699290W 23–13 vs Miami (Ohio)
2025-12-13+85%56223633W 41–6 vs Kennesaw State
2025-12-20+92%1584167No game
2025-12-27+72%21325No game
2026-01-03+76%71784No game
2026-01-10+73%12115No game
2026-01-17+89%809No game
Mood climbed for 3 straight weeks after the week they lost by 3 in OT to North Texas, gaining 111 points.

Season trend

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

PositiveNegative
0%47%95%Aug 29: L 6–23 at Michigan StateLSep 6: L 30–33 (OT) vs North TexasLSep 13: L 0–38 at IllinoisLSep 20: W 14–13 vs ToledoWSep 27: W 47–14 vs Rhode IslandWOct 4: W 21–3 at UMassWOct 11: W 42–0 vs Ball StateWOct 25: L 17–26 at Miami (Ohio)LNov 1: W 24–21 vs Central MichiganWNov 11: W 17–13 vs OhioWNov 18: W 35–19 at Northern IllinoisWNov 25: W 31–21 at Eastern MichiganWDec 6: W 23–13 vs Miami (Ohio)WDec 19: W 41–6 vs Kennesaw StateWAug 23Jan 17
Weekly values: Positive, Negative
Week ofPositiveNegativeComments
2025-08-2386.2%9.4%159
2025-08-3041.6%46%250
2025-09-0625.6%60.3%317
2025-09-1343.1%42%188
2025-09-2080.7%10.2%305
2025-09-2784.7%8.8%137
2025-10-0481.5%8.6%81
2025-10-1186.6%2.5%119
2025-10-1882%8%50
2025-10-2548.4%42.1%126
2025-11-0183.9%10.2%236
2025-11-0877.6%12.4%348
2025-11-1581%9.6%311
2025-11-2285.5%7.6%406
2025-11-2991.7%3.4%351
2025-12-0692.8%3.1%290
2025-12-1388.8%3.6%633
2025-12-2094.6%2.4%167
2025-12-2784%12%25
2026-01-0384.5%8.3%84
2026-01-1080%6.7%15
2026-01-1788.9%0%9

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.

Harm7.8 per 1,000 · 36
Personal Attacks 32Harm Wish 2Group Hate 2
Identity-Based Abuse1.3 per 1,000 · 6
Physical Appearance 3Gender 2Religion 1
Explicit Language8 per 1,000 · 37
Explicit Words 26Explicit Acronym 9Explicit Emoji 1Violent Language 1
College Sports12.2 per 1,000 · 56
Band 11Recruiting 21Student Section 4NIL 7Transfer Portal 11Conference Realignment 4
Off-Field Storylines11.1 per 1,000 · 51
Broadcast & Media 30Officiating 19Player Conduct 1Injuries 1
Sports Betting4.1 per 1,000 · 19
Gambling 17Prop Bet 2
Team & Front Office88.3 per 1,000 · 407
Coaching 285Crowd & Attendance 46Opponent Respect 15Opponent Hostility 35Stadium Experience 26Front Office 6

Subtag counts are tag applications, which may overlap.

The Swear Jar

20th percentile
37 explicit comments8 per 1,000
  • Explicit Words26
  • Explicit Acronym9
  • Explicit Emoji1
  • Violent Language1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

Explicit language shows up in 8 of every 1,000 comments on this page: 82nd of 100 nationally, the 20th percentile.

Moderation snapshot

Harm & identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments · by week
season avg 9.125.2 per 1,000 · L 6–23 at Michigan StateLLLWWWWLWWWWWW2025-08-232026-01-17
Harm and identity-based abuse per 1,000 comments, by week
Week ofRate per 1,000Games
2025-08-2325.2L 6–23 at Michigan State
2025-08-3024No game
2025-09-0622.1L 30–33 (OT) vs North Texas
2025-09-1316L 0–38 at Illinois
2025-09-206.6W 14–13 vs Toledo
2025-09-270W 47–14 vs Rhode Island
2025-10-040W 21–3 at UMass
2025-10-110W 42–0 vs Ball State
2025-10-180No game
2025-10-250L 17–26 at Miami (Ohio)
2025-11-0121.2W 24–21 vs Central Michigan
2025-11-0811.5W 17–13 vs Ohio
2025-11-1512.9W 35–19 at Northern Illinois
2025-11-222.5W 31–21 at Eastern Michigan
2025-11-2911.4No game
2025-12-060W 23–13 vs Miami (Ohio)
2025-12-131.6W 41–6 vs Kennesaw State
2025-12-200No game
2025-12-270No game
2026-01-0311.9No game
2026-01-100No game
2026-01-170No game
Harm and identity-based abuse peaked at 25.2 per 1,000 comments (L 6–23 at Michigan State) against a season average of 9.1 per 1,000.

Season subtag split

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

Harm
  • Personal Attacks32
  • Group Hate2
  • Harm Wish2
Identity-Based Abuse
  • Physical Appearance3
  • Gender2
  • Religion1

Tag applications, which may overlap.

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

From the comment section

Almost as good as EMU. Beat Sparty.

positiveFacebook

You should sell them shirts they are sweet

positiveFacebook

They need to change something around if 1 thing doesn't work then move on to the next. Change the Quarter back for one..

negativeCoachingFacebook

Tough loss, now win the rest of the games and get revenge at Ford field in the Championship game!

mixedFacebook
Behind the numbers

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