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

Pro footballWeek 1Research only

New England Patriots

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: away at Seattle Seahawks. Kickoff and venue are carried by no source on this desk.

Covered players
11
With a posted line
6
Strongest grade
B
Ungraded
0
WR
7
RB
2
TE
2

Playing for a new team in 2026. Prior-season usage for these players was earned elsewhere: Romeo Doubs, A.J. Brown.

The defense opposite

The defense opposite

2025 season

Seattle Seahawks on defence, over 17 games. Every percentage below is a share of the same denominator, this defence’s 690 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
Man18.7%129 of 690 dropbacksrank 28 of 32
Zone77.1%532 of 690 dropbacksrank 5 of 32
Press31.2%215 of 690 dropbacksrank 5 of 32
Disguised40.1%277 of 690 dropbacksrank 6 of 32
Middle of field closed44.1%304 of 690 dropbacksrank 27 of 32
Middle of field open55.9%386 of 690 dropbacksrank 6 of 32
Nickel personnel77.7%536 of 690 dropbacksrank 6 of 32
Base personnel3.5%24 of 690 dropbacksrank 32 of 32
DB heavy personnel17.7%122 of 690 dropbacksrank 11 of 32
Rotates to single high33.6%232 of 690 dropbacksrank 4 of 32
Rotates to two high6.5%45 of 690 dropbacksrank 25 of 32
Splits the safetiesnot reported
Coverage shells
ShellShare of dropbacks
Cover 02.8%19 of 690 dropbacksrank 22 of 32
Cover 113.2%91 of 690 dropbacksrank 28 of 32
Cover 212.6%87 of 690 dropbacksrank 21 of 32
Cover 2 man0.6%4 of 690 dropbacksrank 25 of 32
Cover 330.1%208 of 690 dropbacksrank 16 of 32
Cover 416.7%115 of 690 dropbacksrank 13 of 32
Cover 5not reported
Cover 617.7%122 of 690 dropbacksrank 3 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
WR5 of 32336.216.8over 20 games3612032365156.55on 361 targets56.2%of 361 targets
TE18 of 321618.1over 20 games165119124967.57on 165 targets72.1%of 165 targets
RB3 of 32279.714over 20 games15111981845.42on 151 targets78.8%of 151 targets
Allowed to the quarterback, prior season
Rank allowedPointsPer gameCompletionsYardsTDInterceptionsYards per attempt
13 of 32378.518.9over 20 games441of 709 attempts443225216.25on 709 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: B 5C 2F 4. The grade and the score are prior-season evidence; the receiving-yards line and its two prices are this week’s capture. 6 of 11 rows carry a line. A row without one was not quoted, which is not a line of zero.

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

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
Hunter Henry1.24on 119 routes1.96on 307 routes20.9%on 115 routes3.3%on 301 routes16.7%over 17 games72.3%over 17 games
Mack Hollins1.26on 95 routes1.87on 223 routes25.5%on 94 routes9.1%on 220 routes14.3%over 15 games58.5%over 15 games
Kayshon Boutteno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
TreVeyon Henderson0.52on 42 routes1.1on 176 routes0%on 41 routes0%on 175 routesnot reportednot reported
Romeo Doubs1.31on 126 routes2.12on 251 routes25.6%on 125 routes13.4%on 247 routes17.6%over 16 games72.8%over 16 games
Austin Hooperno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Stefon Diggsno source matches this player by name and team, so nothing keyed on a player id is attached
Kyle Williams2.07on 41 routes0.99on 125 routes24.4%on 41 routes5.6%on 124 routes4.2%over 17 games27.6%over 17 games
A.J. Brown2.97on 114 routes2.02on 328 routes20.5%on 112 routes13%on 324 routes27.5%over 15 games89.5%over 15 games
Demario Douglas4.07on 57 routes1.38on 152 routes41.1%on 56 routes4%on 149 routes8.8%over 17 games35.1%over 17 games
Rhamondre Stevenson3.21on 63 routes0.83on 172 routes8.2%on 61 routes1.2%on 172 routesnot reportednot reported

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.