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

Pro footballWeek 1Research only

Jacksonville Jaguars

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 Cleveland Browns. Kickoff and venue are carried by no source on this desk.

Covered players
11
With a posted line
4
Strongest grade
C
Ungraded
1
WR
6
TE
3
RB
2

The defense opposite

The defense opposite

2025 season

Cleveland Browns on defence, over 17 games. Every percentage below is a share of the same denominator, this defence’s 564 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
Man39.5%223 of 564 dropbacksrank 1 of 32
Zone59%333 of 564 dropbacksrank 31 of 32
Press32.3%182 of 564 dropbacksrank 4 of 32
Disguised22.3%126 of 564 dropbacksrank 30 of 32
Middle of field closed64.4%363 of 564 dropbacksrank 1 of 32
Middle of field open35.6%201 of 564 dropbacksrank 32 of 32
Nickel personnel55.7%314 of 564 dropbacksrank 27 of 32
Base personnel24.8%140 of 564 dropbacksrank 6 of 32
DB heavy personnel17.9%101 of 564 dropbacksrank 9 of 32
Rotates to single high11.5%65 of 564 dropbacksrank 29 of 32
Rotates to two high10.8%61 of 564 dropbacksrank 14 of 32
Splits the safetiesnot reported
Coverage shells
ShellShare of dropbacks
Cover 03%17 of 564 dropbacksrank 20 of 32
Cover 135.5%200 of 564 dropbacksrank 1 of 32
Cover 218.3%103 of 564 dropbacksrank 9 of 32
Cover 2 man0.9%5 of 564 dropbacksrank 20 of 32
Cover 328.7%162 of 564 dropbacksrank 19 of 32
Cover 47.3%41 of 564 dropbacksrank 30 of 32
Cover 5not reported
Cover 64.8%27 of 564 dropbacksrank 26 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
WR9 of 32293.517.3over 17 games2521521862177.39on 252 targets60.3%of 252 targets
TET13 of 32122.97.2over 17 games1198587547.35on 119 targets71.4%of 119 targets
RB19 of 32316.318.6over 17 games927148345.25on 92 targets77.2%of 92 targets
Allowed to the quarterback, prior season
Rank allowedPointsPer gameCompletionsYardsTDInterceptionsYards per attempt
2 of 32282.216.6over 17 games307of 485 attempts318824116.57on 485 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: C 6F 4NG 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 11 rows carry a line. A row without one was not quoted, which is not a line of zero.

Jacksonville Jaguars hosting Cleveland Browns
PlayerPosGradeScoreRec yds lineOverUnderSourcesWhy the score reads this way
LeQuint AllenRBC0.08no 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
Tim PatrickWRC0.03player not matchedno 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
Brian Thomas Jr.WRC-0.0536.5-117-1144
  • 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
Dyami BrownWRC-0.10player 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
Parker WashingtonWRC-0.1053.5-120-1112
  • 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
Travis Etienne Jr.RBC-0.12player not matchedno 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
Travis HunterWRF-1.22no line quotedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable slot funnel vs Cleveland Browns
  • 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
Johnny MundtTEF-1.36player not matchedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable TE funnel vs Cleveland Browns
  • 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
Brenton StrangeTEF-1.4336.5-114-1153
  • unfavorable TE funnel vs Cleveland Browns
  • 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
Hunter LongTEF-1.50player not matchedno priceno pricenone
  • unfavorable TE funnel vs Cleveland Browns
  • 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
Jakobi MeyersWRNGungraded37.5-115-1144
  • 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

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
LeQuint Allen0.08on 39 routes0.49on 95 routes0%on 38 routes0%on 94 routesnot reportednot reported
Tim Patrickno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Brian Thomas Jr.2.03on 102 routes1.58on 316 routes21.8%on 101 routes7.6%on 314 routes18%over 14 games78.6%over 14 games
Dyami Brownno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Parker Washington2.7on 92 routes2.17on 271 routes19.1%on 89 routes6.8%on 266 routes16.9%over 16 games62.2%over 16 games
Travis Etienne Jr.no source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Travis Hunter1.94on 35 routes1.38on 167 routes14.3%on 35 routes5.4%on 167 routes17%over 7 games72.4%over 7 games
Johnny Mundtno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Brenton Strange2.1on 80 routes1.85on 195 routes16.7%on 78 routes2.6%on 191 routes15%over 12 games64.2%over 12 games
Hunter Longno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Jakobi Meyers1.56on 157 routes1.75on 323 routes20%on 155 routes5.3%on 318 routes21.2%over 16 games88.2%over 16 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.