Research · updated weekly
Every wide receiver, tight end and running back gets a role each week: an alignment family (slot, outside X, outside Z; move or inline tight end; three-down, receiving or early-down back) plus style traits (field stretcher, possession, YAC, red zone, goal line) with strengths from 0 to 100. The role used for any prediction is built only from games before kickoff. Below: league baselines for each role, and which role-versus-scheme matchups hold up in 2023–25 data.
Lines up inside. Proxy: a high share of short targets over the middle, a low aDOT and few deep shots, fitted to Fantasy Nerds slot (SWR) depth labels; the latest SWR label before kickoff counts when one exists.
184 players, 1,849 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Amon-Ra St. Brown (DET), Wan'Dale Robinson (TEN), Stefon Diggs (WAS), Zay Flowers (BAL)
Outside receiver who faces press: low Next Gen Stats cushion and more contested targets. Not validated against charted alignment (no free source); treat X vs Z as a lean.
227 players, 2,479 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Michael Wilson (ARI), Jaxon Smith-Njigba (SEA), Tee Higgins (CIN), Davante Adams (LAR)
Outside receiver who plays off the ball: more cushion, more motion, fewer contested targets.
305 players, 2,530 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Chris Olave (NO), CeeDee Lamb (DAL), Puka Nacua (LAR), Ja'Marr Chase (CIN)
High aDOT and a high share of targets 20+ air yards downfield.
126 players, 914 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Chris Olave (NO), Davante Adams (LAR), DK Metcalf (PIT), Matthew Golden (GB)
Mid aDOT, catch rate above what his depth implies, and a large share of targets on third and fourth down.
189 players, 1,239 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Chris Olave (NO), CeeDee Lamb (DAL), Jaxon Smith-Njigba (SEA), Puka Nacua (LAR)
Screens and throws at or behind the line, and yards after catch above nflverse expected YAC.
123 players, 1,060 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Drake London (ATL), Zay Flowers (BAL), Khalil Shakir (BUF), Malik Washington (MIA)
A large share of his team’s red-zone targets, end-zone targets and contested catches.
113 players, 848 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Amon-Ra St. Brown (DET), CeeDee Lamb (DAL), Michael Wilson (ARI), Jaxon Smith-Njigba (SEA)
A receiving tight end: targets per route, aDOT and middle-of-field usage like a slot receiver.
98 players, 1,185 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Trey McBride (ARI), Brock Bowers (LV), Sam LaPorta (DET), Isaiah Likely (NYG)
Plays attached to the line and blocks: snaps without many targets per route; short, flat-type targets.
172 players, 2,857 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Tyler Warren (IND), Juwan Johnson (NO), Harold Fannin Jr. (CLE), Cade Otton (TB)
Most of the snaps, most of the carries and a real passing-down role.
43 players, 667 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: Bijan Robinson (ATL), Jahmyr Gibbs (DET), Jonathan Taylor (IND), Ashton Jeanty (LV)
Passing-down specialist: target share and third-down touches out of line with his carries.
120 players, 1,211 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: D'Andre Swift (CHI), Rhamondre Stevenson (NE), RJ Harvey (DEN), Alvin Kamara (NO)
Carries on first and second down, little passing-down work.
217 players, 2,547 player-games, 2023–25. Routes are on-field dropbacks.
Week 5: James Cook (BUF), Javonte Williams (DAL), Bucky Irving (TB), Breece Hall (NYJ)
A large share of his team’s carries inside the 5.
For each role and scheme we compare the role’s targets (or yards) per route when the defense does it vs when it doesn’t, relative to the same change for the rest of the position. +10% means that role gains 10% more than his position-mates. 195 tests over 2023–25: 0 A, 4 B, 55 C and 136 that don’t hold up. Grades need the same sign in odd and even weeks and out of sample (2023–24 → 2025), after a Benjamini–Hochberg correction.
| Role | Scheme | Metric | Vs position-mates | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | q | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outside X (boundary) | man vs zone | targets per route | +9.9% | +11% | +13% | +8% | 0.02 | B |
| Move TE / big slot | pressure vs clean | targets per route | −16.3% | −17% | −14% | −18% | 0.02 | B |
| Slot receiver | man vs zone | targets per route | −8.8% | −11% | −9% | −8% | 0.02 | B |
| Inline TE | pressure vs clean | targets per route | +19.5% | +21% | +16% | +22% | 0.02 | B |
| Outside X (boundary) | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | −8.3% | −7% | −10% | −9% | 0.06 | C |
| Receiving back | two-high D vs other D | yards per route | +23.7% | −8% | +41% | +51% | 0.06 | C |
| Field stretcher | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | −10.8% | −10% | −13% | −9% | 0.07 | C |
| Early-down / grinder | 8+ box vs lighter box | yards per carry | −15.9% | −14% | −23% | −12% | 0.07 | C |
| Field stretcher | man vs zone | targets per route | +11.8% | +13% | +16% | +7% | 0.08 | C |
| Slot receiver | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | +8.9% | +7% | +17% | +4% | 0.08 | C |
| Move TE / big slot | pressure vs clean | yards per route | −17.4% | −16% | −16% | −21% | 0.08 | C |
| Inline TE | pressure vs clean | yards per route | +21.1% | +19% | +20% | +26% | 0.11 | C |
| Move TE / big slot | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | −9.2% | −12% | −4% | −10% | 0.11 | C |
| Receiving back | blitz vs no blitz | yards per route | −22.1% | −30% | −15% | −21% | 0.11 | C |
| Inline TE | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | +10.1% | +14% | +4% | +12% | 0.16 | C |
| YAC / screen | man vs zone | targets per route | −7.1% | −10% | −5% | −10% | 0.17 | C |
| Receiving back | 8+ box vs lighter box | yards per carry | +20.0% | +6% | +33% | +30% | 0.21 | C |
| Possession / chain-mover | pressure vs clean | targets per route | −9.0% | −12% | −10% | −4% | 0.21 | C |
| Outside X (boundary) | man vs zone | yards per route | +11.1% | +17% | +10% | +8% | 0.22 | C |
| Three-down back | soft cushion vs tight | targets per route | +10.4% | +17% | +20% | +0% | 0.22 | C |
| Red-zone / jump-ball | man vs zone | targets per route | +7.4% | +11% | +16% | −6% | 0.22 | C |
| Red-zone / jump-ball | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | −7.2% | −4% | −10% | −8% | 0.25 | C |
| Receiving back | soft middle vs other D | yards per route | −16.6% | −19% | −20% | −10% | 0.25 | C |
| Receiving back | two-high D vs other D | targets per route | +8.2% | −3% | +17% | +13% | 0.33 | C |
| Red-zone / jump-ball | blitz vs no blitz | targets per route | +6.3% | +5% | +6% | +8% | 0.34 | C |
| Outside X (boundary) | soft cushion vs tight | targets per route | +5.7% | −0% | +3% | +14% | 0.35 | C |
| Possession / chain-mover | pressure vs clean | yards per route | −12.3% | −9% | −15% | −12% | 0.36 | C |
| Early-down / grinder | pressure vs clean | yards per route | +18.6% | +42% | −11% | +35% | 0.36 | C |
| Early-down / grinder | blitz vs no blitz | yards per route | +20.3% | +58% | +34% | −19% | 0.36 | C |
| Three-down back | soft cushion vs tight | yards per route | +18.8% | +28% | +21% | +10% | 0.39 | C |
| Three-down back | two-high D vs other D | yards per route | −14.0% | −5% | +7% | −34% | 0.39 | C |
| YAC / screen | pressure vs clean | targets per route | −7.7% | −8% | −7% | −9% | 0.39 | C |
| Outside Z / flanker | soft middle vs other D | yards per route | −8.2% | −7% | −12% | −5% | 0.42 | C |
| Move TE / big slot | man vs zone | targets per route | +8.9% | +12% | +16% | −4% | 0.44 | C |
| Inline TE | man vs zone | targets per route | −8.2% | −11% | −14% | +4% | 0.47 | C |
| Early-down / grinder | pressure vs clean | targets per route | +9.1% | +10% | +1% | +16% | 0.49 | C |
| Outside Z / flanker | man vs zone | yards per route | −7.0% | −8% | −6% | −8% | 0.66 | C |
| Red-zone / jump-ball | soft cushion vs tight | targets per route | +5.2% | +3% | +11% | +1% | 0.66 | C |
| Red-zone / jump-ball | soft cushion vs tight | yards per route | +7.4% | +1% | +13% | +8% | 0.68 | C |
| Outside X (boundary) | pressure vs clean | yards per route | −7.3% | −12% | −2% | −5% | 0.72 | C |
| Inline TE | two-high vs single-high | yards per route | +7.3% | +5% | +4% | +12% | 0.72 | C |
| Move TE / big slot | two-high vs single-high | yards per route | −6.8% | −4% | −4% | −11% | 0.72 | C |
| Move TE / big slot | two-high D vs other D | targets per route | +4.8% | +4% | +0% | +10% | 0.73 | C |
| Outside X (boundary) | two-high vs single-high | yards per route | −5.3% | −6% | −4% | −7% | 0.73 | C |
| Outside X (boundary) | soft middle vs other D | targets per route | +3.7% | +7% | +1% | +4% | 0.73 | C |
| Field stretcher | man vs zone | yards per route | +8.8% | +7% | +18% | +1% | 0.73 | C |
| Inline TE | two-high D vs other D | targets per route | −4.6% | −4% | −0% | −9% | 0.77 | C |
| Early-down / grinder | soft cushion vs tight | yards per route | −8.7% | −13% | −10% | −3% | 0.83 | C |
| Three-down back | pressure vs clean | targets per route | −6.3% | −0% | −10% | −6% | 0.85 | C |
| Receiving back | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | −4.7% | −7% | −6% | −0% | 0.88 | C |
| Red-zone / jump-ball | blitz vs no blitz | yards per route | +5.5% | +7% | +5% | +5% | 0.93 | C |
| Three-down back | pressure vs clean | yards per route | −7.2% | −1% | −8% | −7% | 0.93 | C |
| Field stretcher | blitz vs no blitz | yards per route | +5.3% | +1% | +15% | +0% | 0.93 | C |
| Outside Z / flanker | man-heavy D vs other D | yards per route | +3.4% | +2% | +7% | +2% | 0.93 | C |
| Receiving back | soft cushion vs tight | targets per route | −4.1% | −3% | −2% | −9% | 0.93 | C |
| Receiving back | soft cushion vs tight | yards per route | −6.5% | −3% | −3% | −11% | 0.93 | C |
| Outside Z / flanker | man vs zone | targets per route | −1.9% | −2% | −4% | −1% | 0.93 | C |
| YAC / screen | two-high vs single-high | targets per route | +2.2% | +0% | +3% | +4% | 0.93 | C |
| Possession / chain-mover | blitz vs no blitz | yards per route | +2.5% | +2% | +4% | +2% | 0.93 | C |
136 more tests failed (grade F) and are not listed. The TE and WR alignment roles split each position, so their rows mirror each other (move vs inline TEs).
We turned the role-vs-scheme results into over/under calls on consensus receiving props (role from games before kickoff, defense tendencies from before the game, effects fitted on the other seasons) and graded them. At standard −110 pricing a call needs to win 52.4% to break even. None did.
| Market | Season | Calls | Won | 95% interval |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Receiving yards | 2023 | 2,569 | 50.1% | 48.2%–52.1% |
| Receiving yards | 2024 | 2,429 | 49.7% | 47.8%–51.7% |
| Receiving yards | 2025 | 2,614 | 50.3% | 48.4%–52.2% |
| Receptions | 2023 | 1,819 | 49.5% | 47.2%–51.8% |
| Receptions | 2024 | 1,596 | 51.1% | 48.7%–53.6% |
| Receptions | 2025 | 1,793 | 52.0% | 49.7%–54.3% |
| Longest reception | 2025 | 2,559 | 48.3% | 46.4%–50.2% |
| Receiving yards | All | 7,612 | 50.0% | 48.9%–51.2% |
| Receptions | All | 5,208 | 50.9% | 49.5%–52.2% |
| Longest reception | All | 2,559 | 48.3% | 46.4%–50.2% |
The most established receivers, tight ends and backs going into Week 5. Full tags are on every player and team page.
Charting data: FTN Data via nflverse, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0; our derived charting figures are shared under the same licence. Coverage allowed by defender: Pro Football Reference via nflverse. Coverage type (man/zone, shells): nflverse participation data. Play-by-play: nflverse.
Two labels, never mixed. The pregame role for a week uses only games that kicked off earlier (recent games count more; last season counts half) and the latest depth chart published before kickoff. The game role describes what he did in that game and is used only for history. Projections, matchup notes and prop tests read the pregame role.
Features are shrunk toward the position average when the sample is small: share of targets short over the middle, aDOT, deep share, screens and throws behind the line, yards after catch over expected, contested and end-zone targets, third-down and red-zone share, Next Gen Stats cushion, and for backs carry, early-down, goal-line, target and third-down shares. Slot is a logistic model fitted to depth-chart slot labels; other traits are percentiles among 2023–25 regulars.
Role-vs-scheme tests group players by their pregame role and use per-play coverage (man/zone, shells, pressure) from 2023–25 participation data and FTN blitz charting, with routes measured as on-field dropbacks. Standard errors come from resampling players. Player splits on player pages use only data available before the week and are shrunk toward the role by how much player splits repeat (they mostly don’t).
Sources: nflverse play-by-play, participation and depth charts, FTN Data via nflverse, Next Gen Stats via nflverse, Fantasy Nerds depth chartsUpdated 2026-10-07
Yes, relative to other receivers. In 2023–25 slot receivers drew about 9% fewer targets per route against man coverage than outside receivers did (grade B), and outside X receivers drew about 10% more against man (grade B). These are role tendencies; an individual receiver’s own man-vs-zone split barely repeats.
We estimate it from where and how deep he is targeted (short throws over the middle, low aDOT, screens) and from depth-chart slot labels when they exist before kickoff. Against depth-chart slot labels the estimate is right about four times in five.
Not in our tests. Calls built from role-vs-scheme effects on receiving yards, receptions and longest reception props won 48–51% in 2023–25, short of the 52.4% needed at -110.
Mostly. A player’s pregame role carries over to the next week about nine times in ten, and changes after trades, injuries and depth-chart moves are picked up as games accumulate.
