← Insights
Matchup profiles
How teams with a given statistical makeup cover: elite offenses, bad defenses, run-heavy dogs.
Ratings are opponent-adjusted EPA per play known BEFORE each game, ranked among teams that week. Elite = top quarter, bad = bottom quarter.
| Profile (since 2015) | ATS | As favorite | As underdog | Overs | 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elite offense vs bad defenseTop-quarter offense facing a bottom-quarter defense. | 196-208-9 (49%) | 178-192-8 | 18-16-1 | 49.3% | 6-9-2 |
| Bad offense vs elite defenseBottom-quarter offense facing a top-quarter defense. | 179-205-9 (47%) | 10-26-1 | 169-179-8 | 51.4% | 4-5-1 |
| Elite offense vs elite defenseStrength on strength. | 290-264-12 (52%) | 170-152-7 | 120-112-5 | 49.3% | 7-9-1 |
| Complete teamsTop-quarter offense AND defense. | 270-287-12 (48%) | 228-243-9 | 42-44-3 | 51.0% | 3-10-1 |
| Bottom-quarter on both sidesBottom-quarter offense AND defense. | 251-226-12 (53%) | 22-27-2 | 228-198-10 | 50.3% | 6-7-2 |
| Underdogs with an elite defenseDefense travels. | 285-303-19 (48%) | — | 285-303-19 | 48.0% | 10-11-2 |
| Favorites with a bad offenseLaying points without scoring punch. | 150-200-13 (43%) | 150-200-13 | — | 49.3% | 7-7 |
| Elite offenses laying 7+Can they cover big numbers? | 256-284-12 (47%) | 256-284-12 | — | 47.6% | 3-11-1 |
| Pass-heavy offense vs bad pass defensePassing more than expected, facing a bottom-quarter pass defense. | 213-190-13 (53%) | 169-157-10 | 44-33-3 | 47.9% | 4-8-1 |
| Run-heavy underdogsShorten the game, keep it close? | 415-405-24 (51%) | — | 415-405-24 | 50.1% | 14-17-2 |
| Underdogs rated as the better teamOur efficiency ratings disagree with the market. | 304-287-15 (51%) | — | 304-287-15 | 49.3% | 8-14-1 |
The market prices team quality well. What stands out: favorites with a bad offense covered only 42.9%, and elite offenses laying 7 or more covered 47.4%.