Skip to content
Scheme Scoreby Nothing But Bet
GlossaryPlayer prop gambling research. Not advice.

Pro footballWeek 1Research only

San Francisco 49ers at Los Angeles Rams

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
22
San Francisco 49ers
10
Los Angeles Rams
12

The market on this game

The line

2026 week 1

One dated capture, so there is no movement and no closing number here. Prices are American odds as published. No operator is named.

Spread and moneyline, by side
SideSpreadSpread priceMoneyline
San Francisco 49ersSF+3.5no price+164
Los Angeles RamsLAR-3.5no price-198
Total, and the team totals it implies
MarketNumberOverUnder
Game total48.5no priceno price
San Francisco 49ers implied22.5derived here, not posted
Los Angeles Rams implied26.5derived 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: Thu, Sep 10, 8:35 PM EDT. Venue is carried by no source on this desk, so none is shown.

The public split

2026 week 1

Cash 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.

Top concepts by leverage, both offenses
ConceptOffenseOffense rankDefense rankUsageFavoursLeverage
Staying on scheduleSummaryLos Angeles Rams1 of 3230 of 32every playLos Angeles Rams29
Pass gameSummaryLos Angeles Rams3 of 3225 of 32every playLos Angeles Rams22
Overall EPA/playSummaryLos Angeles Rams2 of 3224 of 32every playLos Angeles Rams22
Zone coveragePassing SplitsLos Angeles Rams3 of 3228 of 3276.3%San Francisco 49ersLos Angeles Rams19.07
Pass rate over expectedSummarySan Francisco 49ers9 of 3228 of 32every playSan Francisco 49ers19
MotionOffensive IdentityLos Angeles Rams3 of 3227 of 3263.5%Los Angeles RamsLos Angeles Rams15.24
Single-high coveragePassing SplitsLos Angeles Rams3 of 3225 of 3255.4%San Francisco 49ersLos Angeles Rams12.19
Zone runsRun ConceptLos Angeles Rams2 of 3227 of 3246.9%Los Angeles RamsLos Angeles Rams11.72
3-WR sets (11 personnel)Personnel UsageLos Angeles Rams5 of 3224 of 3258.7%Los Angeles RamsLos Angeles Rams11.15
Run gameSummaryLos Angeles Rams7 of 3218 of 32every playLos Angeles Rams11

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.

San Francisco 49ers

Grade mix: A 1B 3C 1D 3F 2

San Francisco 49ers at Los Angeles Rams
PlayerPosGradeScoreRec yds lineOverUnderSourcesWhy the score reads this way
Kendrick BourneWRA0.80player not matchedno priceno pricenone
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Deebo SamuelWRB0.6429.5-112-1155
  • favorable slot funnel vs Los Angeles Rams
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Christian McCaffreyRBB0.6139.5-117-1154
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Demarcus RobinsonWRB0.5511.5-114-1144
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Mike EvansWRC-0.0149.5-115-1146
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Ricky PearsallWRD-0.19no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
George KittleTED-0.4136.5-115-1145
  • unfavorable TE funnel vs Los Angeles Rams
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Jauan JenningsWRD-0.60player not matchedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Jake TongesTEF-0.83no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable TE funnel vs Los Angeles Rams
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Luke FarrellTEF-0.89no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable TE funnel vs Los Angeles Rams
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix

Los Angeles Rams

Grade mix: A+ 1A 2B 4C 4D 1

Los Angeles Rams hosting San Francisco 49ers
PlayerPosGradeScoreRec yds lineOverUnderSourcesWhy the score reads this way
Tyler HigbeeTEA+1.4614.5-115-1144
  • favorable TE funnel vs San Francisco 49ers
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Davis AllenTEA1.13no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • favorable TE funnel vs San Francisco 49ers
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Terrance FergusonTEA0.9024.5-114-1125
  • favorable TE funnel vs San Francisco 49ers
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Puka NacuaWRB0.7290.5-114-1153
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Colby ParkinsonTEB0.6219.5-118-1144
  • favorable TE funnel vs San Francisco 49ers
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Jordan WhittingtonWRB0.61no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Blake CorumRBB0.54no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Xavier SmithWRC0.15no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • favorable slot funnel vs San Francisco 49ers
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Davante AdamsWRC0.1251.5-114-1153
  • favorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Kyren WilliamsRBC-0.0710.5-114-1145
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • favorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Tutu AtwellWRC-0.18no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • favorable slot funnel vs San Francisco 49ers
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix
Konata MumpfieldWRD-0.40no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable man/zone fit from the receiver's man-vs-zone production split
  • unfavorable usage fit: target share tilts with this defense's coverage mix

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.