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

Pro footballWeek 1Research only

Carolina Panthers

The defense this roster faces, what it allowed by position, every covered pass catcher with the market's number on him, and the evidence under each grade.

Board generated
Aug 28, 12:12 PM EDT
Line captured
2026-09-09
Dated to the day. One capture, so no movement.
Coverage table
2025 season
Prior season. Not a 2026 measurement of anything.

This week: hosting Chicago Bears. Kickoff and venue are carried by no source on this desk.

Covered players
10
With a posted line
4
Strongest grade
A+
Ungraded
0
WR
5
TE
3
RB
2

The defense opposite

The defense opposite

2025 season

Chicago Bears on defence, over 17 games. Every percentage below is a share of the same denominator, this defence’s 595 dropbacks, and each one prints the count it came from so it can be checked against the number beside it. The rank is against the other thirty-one teams. None of this is 2026: a coordinator change or a personnel change is not in it.

Coverage and personnel rates
RateShare of dropbacks
Man29.9%178 of 595 dropbacksrank 8 of 32
Zone64.7%385 of 595 dropbacksrank 24 of 32
Press22.5%134 of 595 dropbacksrank 19 of 32
Disguised24.2%144 of 595 dropbacksrank 25 of 32
Middle of field closed49.9%297 of 595 dropbacksrank 17 of 32
Middle of field open50.1%298 of 595 dropbacksrank 16 of 32
Nickel personnel75.5%449 of 595 dropbacksrank 10 of 32
Base personnel8.9%53 of 595 dropbacksrank 29 of 32
DB heavy personnel14.3%85 of 595 dropbacksrank 15 of 32
Rotates to single high13.6%81 of 595 dropbacksrank 26 of 32
Rotates to two high10.4%62 of 595 dropbacksrank 15 of 32
Splits the safetiesnot reported
Coverage shells
ShellShare of dropbacks
Cover 04.9%29 of 595 dropbacksrank 7 of 32
Cover 120%119 of 595 dropbacksrank 12 of 32
Cover 222.4%133 of 595 dropbacksrank 3 of 32
Cover 2 man3.9%23 of 595 dropbacksrank 3 of 32
Cover 328.7%171 of 595 dropbacksrank 19 of 32
Cover 410.4%62 of 595 dropbacksrank 28 of 32
Cover 5not reported
Cover 63.2%19 of 595 dropbacksrank 29 of 32

Cover 5 is reported by neither coverage source for any team, and the split-safety rate arrives as an identical zero for all thirty-two with no count behind it. Both are shown as unreported. Neither is a defence that never plays them.

What that defense allowed, by position

prior season

The allowed totals are a completed prior season: the game counts of 17 to 21 describe a regular season plus playoffs. PFF does not label the season in this export. captured 2026-09-08, before any 2026 game, so the completed season behind these totals is 2025. Recorded as an inference, not as something the file says.

Allowed to pass catchers, prior season
PositionRank allowedPointsPer gameTargetsCatchesYardsTDYards per targetCatch rate
WR31 of 32482.825.4over 19 games3432183134259.14on 343 targets63.6%of 343 targets
TET13 of 32135.97.2over 19 games14310599466.95on 143 targets73.4%of 143 targets
RB17 of 32342.618over 19 games977551455.3on 97 targets77.3%of 97 targets
Allowed to the quarterback, prior season
Rank allowedPointsPer gameCompletionsYardsTDInterceptionsYards per attempt
30 of 3244723.5over 19 games399of 621 attempts464836237.48on 621 attempts

Rank 32 allowed the most fantasy points to the position and rank 1 allowed the least. A T prefix is a tie. The game counts run past seventeen because they include the playoffs.

Covered players

Grade mix on this roster: A+ 1A 1B 2C 3D 2F 1. The grade and the score are prior-season evidence; the receiving-yards line and its two prices are this week’s capture. 4 of 10 rows carry a line. A row without one was not quoted, which is not a line of zero.

Carolina Panthers hosting Chicago Bears
PlayerPosGradeScoreRec yds lineOverUnderSourcesWhy the score reads this way
Brycen TremayneWRA+1.51no 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
Mitchell EvansTEA0.90no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • mildly unfavorable TE funnel vs Chicago Bears
  • 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
Chuba HubbardRBB0.50no 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
Ja'Tavion SandersTEB0.37no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • mildly unfavorable TE funnel vs Chicago Bears
  • 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
Rico DowdleRBC0.27player 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
Tommy TrembleTEC-0.0215.5-114-1143
  • mildly unfavorable TE funnel vs Chicago Bears
  • 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 LegetteWRC-0.1618.5-114-1155
  • 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
Tetairoa McMillanWRD-0.2358.5-114-1154
  • 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
Hunter RenfrowWRD-0.35player not matchedno priceno pricenone
  • mildly unfavorable slot funnel vs Chicago Bears
  • 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
Jalen CokerWRF-1.2239.5-115-1145
  • 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

The evidence under the grades

Receiver evidence

2025 season

The board asserts a coverage lean. This is what it is asserting from: FantasyPoints’s own receiving splits, yards per route run against man and against zone with the routes behind each, the win rate in each, and the share of the offence the receiver held. Prior season, published under a 2026 board, and a rookie or a player who moved has no history to show.

Man and zone production, separation, and share of the offence
PlayerYards per route, manYards per route, zoneWin rate, manWin rate, zoneTarget shareRoute share
Brycen Tremaynenot reported2.11on 76 routes12.5%on 24 routes11.8%on 76 routes3.5%over 16 games19.2%over 16 games
Mitchell Evans0.12on 17 routes1.67on 99 routes6.3%on 16 routes2%on 98 routes4.3%over 17 games20.9%over 17 games
Chuba Hubbard-0.03on 40 routes1.44on 152 routes0%on 40 routes0%on 151 routesnot reportednot reported
Ja'Tavion Sanders0.36on 50 routes1.1on 150 routes12%on 50 routes2.7%on 148 routes8.7%over 13 games46.9%over 13 games
Rico Dowdleno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Tommy Tremble0.53on 51 routes1.14on 195 routes7.8%on 51 routes1%on 192 routes7%over 17 games44.2%over 17 games
Xavier Legette1.22on 85 routes0.93on 275 routes14.1%on 85 routes3.3%on 270 routes13.4%over 15 games72.6%over 15 games
Tetairoa McMillan2.24on 121 routes1.91on 376 routes22.3%on 121 routes10.5%on 370 routes23.1%over 17 games89.4%over 17 games
Hunter Renfrowno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Jalen Coker2.63on 65 routes1.04on 190 routes27.7%on 65 routes4.8%on 188 routes13.2%over 11 games75.5%over 11 games

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.