Pro football/Week 1/Research only
Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Cincinnati Bengals
What the market posted on this game, what the public did with it, which concepts decide it, and who is covered on each side.
- Board generated
- Aug 28, 12:12 PM EDT
- Line captured
- 2026-09-09
- Dated to the day. One capture, so no movement.
- Matchup card captured
- 2026-09-08
- Prior-season concept ranks, not a 2026 measurement.
- Covered players
- 17
- Tampa Bay Buccaneers
- 7
- Cincinnati Bengals
- 10
The market on this game
The line
2026 week 1One dated capture, so there is no movement and no closing number here. Prices are American odds as published. No operator is named.
| Side | Spread | Spread price | Moneyline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tampa Bay BuccaneersTB | +3.5 | no price | +164 |
| Cincinnati BengalsCIN | -3.5 | no price | -198 |
| Market | Number | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|---|
| Game total | 50.5 | no price | no price |
| Tampa Bay Buccaneers implied | 23.5 | derived here, not posted | |
| Cincinnati Bengals implied | 27.5 | derived here, not posted | |
No implied team totals. They need both a posted total and a posted spread, and this game is missing one of them.
Kickoff: Sun, Sep 13, 1:00 PM EDT. Venue is carried by no source on this desk, so none is shown.
The public split
2026 week 1Cash is the share of money on a side. Tickets is the share of bets. The two sides of each market are printed together because that is what makes the denominator visible: each pair sums to one hundred. The vendor publishes shares only, so no dollar amount and no ticket count stands behind them.
No public split was published for this game.
What decides it
What decides this game
Season 2025 (default)Ranked by FantasyPoints’s own leverage figure: how far apart the two units rank, weighted by how often the concept is on the field. Ranks are out of thirty-two. Usage is that unit’s own share of its plays, published as a share with no snap count behind it. A concept appears once per offense, so a label you see twice is two different mismatches, not a repeat.
| Concept | Offense | Offense rank | Defense rank | Usage | Favours | Leverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MotionOffensive Identity | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 9 of 32 | 28 of 32 | 67.6%Tampa Bay Buccaneers | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 12.84 |
| Pass gameSummary | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 16 of 32 | 28 of 32 | every play | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 12 |
| Explosive playsSummary | Cincinnati Bengals | 26 of 32 | 15 of 32 | every play | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 11 |
| Explosive playsSummary | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 18 of 32 | 29 of 32 | every play | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 11 |
| Short passingPass Depth | Cincinnati Bengals | 27 of 32 | 6 of 32 | 48.3%Cincinnati Bengals | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 10.14 |
| Two-high coveragePassing Splits | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 10 of 32 | 32 of 32 | 43.3%Cincinnati Bengals | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 9.53 |
| Overall EPA/playSummary | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 20 of 32 | 29 of 32 | every play | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 9 |
| Run gameSummary | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 22 of 32 | 30 of 32 | every play | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 8 |
| Under pressureBlitz & Pressure | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 6 of 32 | 23 of 32 | 37%Cincinnati Bengals | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 6.29 |
| 3-WR sets (11 personnel)Personnel Usage | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 19 of 32 | 28 of 32 | 69.1%Tampa Bay Buccaneers | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 6.22 |
Who is covered
The grade and the score are prior-season evidence. The line and the two prices beside them are this week’s capture. They are different years and the column heads say so; nothing here reconciles one to the other.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Grade mix: A+ 1B 4C 2
| Player | Pos | Grade | Score | Rec yds line | Over | Under | Sources | Why the score reads this way |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cade Otton | TE | A+ | 3.04 | 28.5 | -114 | -115 | 6 |
|
| Bucky Irving | RB | B | 0.55 | 13.5 | -117 | -113 | 5 |
|
| Emeka Egbuka | WR | B | 0.44 | 53.5 | -115 | -115 | 3 |
|
| Rachaad White | RB | B | 0.40 | player not matched | no price | no price | none |
|
| Tez Johnson | WR | B | 0.31 | no line quoted | no price | no price | none |
|
| Chris Godwin | WR | C | -0.14 | 41.5 | -115 | -115 | 5 |
|
| Sterling Shepard | WR | C | -0.17 | player not matched | no price | no price | none |
|
Cincinnati Bengals
Grade mix: A+ 1A 2B 2C 2D 1F 2
| Player | Pos | Grade | Score | Rec yds line | Over | Under | Sources | Why the score reads this way |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noah Fant | TE | A+ | 1.94 | player not matched | no price | no price | none |
|
| Mike Gesicki | TE | A | 1.00 | 20.5 | -113 | -114 | 3 |
|
| Ja'Marr Chase | WR | A | 0.99 | 85.5 | -115 | -114 | 3 |
|
| Samaje Perine | RB | B | 0.67 | 6.5 | -120 | -110 | 6 |
|
| Tanner Hudson | TE | B | 0.58 | player not matched | no price | no price | none |
|
| Chase Brown | RB | C | 0.29 | 23.5 | -115 | -115 | 6 |
|
| Andrei Iosivas | WR | C | -0.18 | no line quoted | no price | no price | none |
|
| Drew Sample | TE | D | -0.19 | no line quoted | no price | no price | none |
|
| Mitchell Tinsley | WR | F | -1.18 | player not matched | no price | no price | none |
|
| Tee Higgins | WR | F | -1.34 | 61.5 | -115 | -115 | 4 |
|
Where the fixture comes from. Who hosts is not in the Scheme Score export. It is read from the prop capture, which marks an away team, and cross-checked against the FantasyPoints matchup cards, which title themselves the same way. The two agree on 16 of 16 games. Neither source carries a venue, so none is shown.
Where the price comes from. From one dated prop capture, the same one the Scheme Score export now carries on its own priced rows, so the feed and this page state one answer rather than two. A line here is the consensus across independent sources in that capture, joined to the board by player name and team, and the two prices are the median quote at that line. A row with no line was quoted by nobody in the capture under the name and team the board uses; that is unpriced, not a line of zero. The Sources column says how many sources stood behind a number; it never says which ones, and no operator is named anywhere on this site. The capture is dated 2026-09-09 and is recorded to the day, not to a clock time, so no reader may date it more finely. One capture, so there is no line movement and no closing line.
Availability is not stated here. The 2026 week 1 practice report on this desk carries eleven rows across two of the thirty-two teams, and not one of them states a report status. Official inactives are published in no source here. So these pages say nothing about who plays, and a player appearing on them is not evidence that he will.
Scheme Score is a matchup feature built for player-prop gambling research. It is one input to a betting decision, not a standalone player projection, hit probability, expected value estimate, or stake size. Most rows on this board now carry a grade. The man and zone coverage signal is live: both the man/zone fit and the usage fit legs contribute to a grade, reflecting whether a receiver's style and usage lean toward the coverage this defense plays most. The slot coverage funnel is a direct measurement from PFF's slot coverage report, not an estimate. Some inputs are still missing. Direct TE and RB receiving funnels are not available: tight ends run through the linebacker coverage proxy, and running backs get no receiving funnel signal at all. Defender coverage grades still do not contribute to any grade, because that leg needs each defense's 2026 returning-share data, which does not exist here. The defensive coordinator table is an unfilled stub, so no coordinator discount is applied to any row. A small number of rows stay ungraded because the player name on that row is ambiguous and the grader skips rather than guesses. This board is two tiers. 134 of 290 rows are priced: they carry a posted receiving-yards line from one dated prop capture, joined to the board by player name and team, plus the median over and under price quoted at that line and a count of how many independent sources stood behind it. The other 156 rows carry no line, which means no source in that capture quoted them under the name and team this board uses; that is unpriced, not a line of zero, and it is not a claim that the player will not play. Which operator quoted a number is withheld everywhere in this feed; how many stood behind it is published instead. The capture is recorded to the day and not to a clock time, so no reader may date it more finely, and it is a single capture, so there is no line movement and no closing line here. The line does not enter Scheme Score: the grade is computed from prior-season scheme and usage evidence alone, so a grade is never a projection of the line beside it.