Same question,real evidence.

Judkins lands almost identically to his tight end teammate, and for a different reason entirely. There's no funnel signal at his wide alignment against the Jacksonville Jaguars, so the case is built on two legs instead of three: a strongly favorable man/zone fit from his man-versus-zone split, the standout number on this card, backed by a usage fit that also tilts favorable. A running back grading this well on a receiving score is purely a statement about coverage shape at that alignment, not a workload call. Defender fit remains unscored, and nothing here should be confused with a prediction about how often Cleveland actually gets him out there in that role.

Pitts is a study in one dominant leg carrying a mixed card. The coverage funnel against the Pittsburgh Steelers is clearly favorable and does essentially all the work toward the A grade, while both the man/zone fit and the usage fit actually point unfavorable, meaning his own man-versus-zone split and the target-share tilt aren't cooperating with the funnel read. That split is worth sitting with before treating this grade as a clean green light, since two of three legs are working against it. The defender fit component is unscored across the board, this model has no way yet to grade the specific coverage assignment he'll draw, so the funnel strength alone shouldn't be read as certainty about targets or production.

Rice's grade is a two-leg story with no funnel read available for a receiver at his alignment. Against the Denver Broncos, the man/zone fit off his man-versus-zone split is strongly favorable, and usage fit tilts his way too, if only slightly, and together those two legs are enough to land him at an A grade. It's a clean if narrow case, built on fewer inputs than some of the tight ends carrying funnel data on this list. The defender fit leg stays dark since coverage-assignment detail for returning players isn't part of this score yet, so this reads as favorable matchup shape, not a guaranteed target bump.

Chase's card looks almost identical in structure to Rice's, minus the raw magnitude. There's no funnel signal at his alignment against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, so the A grade again comes down to two legs: a strongly favorable man/zone fit from his man-versus-zone split, and a usage fit that leans favorable as well, though only modestly. Two positive legs producing a grade this high says the man/zone read is doing serious work here specifically. As always, defender fit is unscored, and none of this accounts for scheme wrinkles or coverage rotations a defense might throw at a receiver this good on a given Sunday.

Dulcich sits on the other side of the same game as Bowers, and his card reads almost like a mirror image. The coverage funnel against the Las Vegas Raiders is favorable, and usage fit tilts his way too, but the man/zone fit from his own man-versus-zone split actually comes in unfavorable, which is what keeps this at an A instead of pushing higher. It's a case of two legs outvoting one, not a unanimous read. Defender fit is unscored here as it is everywhere on this list, so the funnel strength describes the Raiders' coverage shape against tight ends broadly, not a guarantee about what happens to this particular route tree.

Waddle's entry here has him with the Denver Broncos, and the grade is built entirely off that alignment against the Kansas City Chiefs. There's no funnel read available at his wide alignment, so the A grade rests on a favorable man/zone fit from his man-versus-zone split and a usage fit that also tilts his way, even if the usage number itself is thin. Two legs pointed the same direction is enough here, but it's a narrower case than some of the tight ends above him on this list. Defender fit stays unscored, and this grade says nothing about volume in a new offense, only about how the coverage shape against Kansas City lines up with his production profile.

London and Pitts play the same opponent this week and land in completely different tiers. There's no funnel signal at London's wide alignment against the Pittsburgh Steelers, unlike his tight end teammate, so the B grade here is built on a man/zone fit that's favorable but modest, plus a usage fit tilting slightly his way. Neither leg is emphatic, which is exactly why this sits a full grade below Pitts despite sharing an opponent. Defender fit remains unscored, as it does for every name here, and a B on this scale is still a real lean toward favorable coverage shape, just not the loudest one on the board this week.

Nacua's grade is quiet by this list's standards, a modest lean rather than a loud one. Against the San Francisco 49ers there's no funnel read at his alignment, so the B comes from a man/zone fit that's favorable without being emphatic, backed by a usage fit that tilts only slightly in his direction. Two legs, both mild, is a fair description of this card, and it's worth sitting next to his teammate Corum and the San Francisco 49ers' own Deebo Samuel in the same game to see how differently this matchup grades by alignment. Defender fit is unscored, and a B here is context about coverage shape, not a target floor.

Samuel's listing has him with San Francisco now, and the model reads him out of the slot against the Los Angeles Rams. The slot funnel here is clearly favorable and is what's carrying the B grade, while his own man/zone fit off the man-versus-zone split comes in unfavorable and usage fit tilts unfavorable too, so two of three legs are actually working against the number that gets top billing. That's a funnel-driven grade with real pushback underneath it, worth knowing before treating it as a clean signal. Defender fit stays dark as always, and nothing here speaks to how a new offense will actually deploy him on a given down.

Henry is the rare tight end on this list whose funnel leg is the one working against him. The coverage funnel against the Seattle Seahawks reads mildly unfavorable, but a favorable man/zone fit from his man-versus-zone split and a usage fit tilting his way pull the overall grade back up to a B anyway. That's two legs overriding a soft funnel read, the inverse of how most of the tight ends above him on this list are built. The defender fit component is unscored here too, so the grade is describing a mixed matchup shape rather than promising the funnel drag won't matter on Sunday.

McLaurin's card splits right down the middle between his two graded legs. There's no funnel signal at his alignment against the Philadelphia Eagles, so the B grade weighs a favorable man/zone fit from his man-versus-zone split against a usage fit that actually tilts unfavorable, the target-share read working against him even as the coverage read works for him. That kind of disagreement between legs is exactly what keeps a score in the middle tier instead of pushing toward the top of this list. Defender fit is unscored as always, and this grade shouldn't be read as a statement about how Washington's game plan uses him against a divisional opponent.

McBride's funnel leg drags a little, but the other two do enough to keep him in the B tier. The coverage funnel against the Los Angeles Chargers is mildly unfavorable, yet a favorable man/zone fit from his man-versus-zone split and a usage fit that also tilts his way are enough to offset it and land a solid grade anyway. It's a similar shape to Henry's card elsewhere on this list, a soft funnel outvoted by two agreeing legs. Defender fit remains unscored, and the grade here is a read on matchup shape only, not a claim about how often the ball actually finds him on Sunday.

Corum's grade leans on usage fit more than any other name on this list. Lined up wide against the San Francisco 49ers, there's no funnel read available, and the man/zone fit off his man-versus-zone split barely registers positive, so it's the usage fit, the strongest single leg on his card, doing the real work toward the B grade. A running back's usage fit tilting this favorably is a specific statement about how target share lines up with this defense's coverage mix, nothing more. Defender fit stays unscored, and this says nothing about whether Los Angeles actually funnels enough of the passing game his way to matter.

Likely's listing has him with the Giants now, sharing this week's Dallas Cowboys matchup with running back Cam Skattebo. The tight end funnel against Dallas is favorable and carries the B grade almost by itself, while his own man/zone fit and usage fit both come in unfavorable, meaning the man-versus-zone split and the target-share tilt aren't backing up the funnel read. That's a lower grade than Skattebo's despite sharing an opponent, and the gap traces directly to those two legs pulling the other way. Defender fit is unscored as it is for every name on this list, so treat the funnel number as coverage shape for a new offense, not a settled target share.

Egbuka closes out this list with the lowest score of the twenty, and it's still a real favorable lean, not a marginal one. Facing the Cincinnati Bengals, the same defense Ja'Marr Chase draws from the other side, there's no funnel read at his alignment, so the case comes down to a favorable man/zone fit from his man-versus-zone split while usage fit sits essentially flat, tilting neither for him nor against him. One clearly positive leg and one neutral one is enough to hold a B grade, if barely. Defender fit remains unscored, and closing at the bottom of this list still means the coverage shape read favorable, just not emphatically so.