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

Pro footballWeek 1Research only

New England Patriots at Seattle Seahawks

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
18
New England Patriots
11
Seattle Seahawks
7

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
New England PatriotsNE+3no price+136
Seattle SeahawksSEA-3no price-162
Total, and the team totals it implies
MarketNumberOverUnder
Game total44.5no priceno price
New England Patriots implied20.5derived here, not posted
Seattle Seahawks implied23.5derived 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: Wed, Sep 9, 8:20 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
Run gameSummaryNew England Patriots27 of 321 of 32every playSeattle Seahawks26
Pass rate over expectedSummaryNew England Patriots5 of 3218 of 32every playNew England Patriots13
Staying on scheduleSummarySeattle Seahawks14 of 3223 of 32every playSeattle Seahawks9
Gap runsRun ConceptNew England Patriots17 of 321 of 3253.4%New England PatriotsSeattle Seahawks8.54
Short passingPass DepthNew England Patriots1 of 3218 of 3249.2%New England PatriotsNew England Patriots8.36
Run gameSummarySeattle Seahawks23 of 3216 of 32every playNew England Patriots7
Zone runsRun ConceptNew England Patriots21 of 321 of 3230.9%New England PatriotsSeattle Seahawks6.18
3-WR sets (11 personnel)Personnel UsageNew England Patriots1 of 3211 of 3248.9%New England PatriotsNew England Patriots4.89
Zone coveragePassing SplitsNew England Patriots2 of 328 of 3277.1%Seattle SeahawksNew England Patriots4.63
3-WR sets (11 personnel)Personnel UsageSeattle Seahawks20 of 329 of 3241.4%Seattle SeahawksNew England Patriots4.55

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.

New England Patriots

Grade mix: B 5C 2F 4

New England Patriots at Seattle Seahawks
PlayerPosGradeScoreRec yds lineOverUnderSourcesWhy the score reads this way
Hunter HenryTEB0.6333.5-119-1137
  • mildly unfavorable TE funnel vs Seattle Seahawks
  • 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
Mack HollinsWRB0.609.5-110-1203
  • 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
Kayshon BoutteWRB0.55player 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
TreVeyon HendersonRBB0.53no 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
Romeo DoubsWRB0.3035.5-115-1144
  • 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
Austin HooperTEC0.19player not matchedno priceno pricenone
  • mildly unfavorable TE funnel vs Seattle Seahawks
  • 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
Stefon DiggsWRC0.06player not matchedno priceno pricenone
  • 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
Kyle WilliamsWRF-0.86no 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
A.J. BrownWRF-0.9064.5-120-1134
  • 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
Demario DouglasWRF-1.4320.5-115-1154
  • mildly unfavorable slot funnel vs Seattle Seahawks
  • 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
Rhamondre StevensonRBF-1.8724.5-118-1154
  • 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

Seattle Seahawks

Grade mix: A 1B 2C 1D 1F 1NG 1

Seattle Seahawks hosting New England Patriots
PlayerPosGradeScoreRec yds lineOverUnderSourcesWhy the score reads this way
Elijah ArroyoTEA1.067.5-118-1132
  • favorable TE funnel vs New England Patriots
  • 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
Zach CharbonnetRBB0.50no 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
AJ BarnerTEB0.3424.5-113-1134
  • favorable TE funnel vs New England Patriots
  • 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
Jaxon Smith-NjigbaWRC-0.0181.5-114-1133
  • 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
Cooper KuppWRD-0.3129.5-115-1135
  • 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
Tory HortonWRF-0.81no 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
Rashid ShaheedWRNGungraded31.5-113-1135
  • no scheme evidence for this matchup (no alignment record or opponent signal)
  • ungraded
  • receiver alignment: player name is ambiguous across multiple alignment rows
  • skipped rather than guessed

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.