NFL 2026 · Week 2
Kick-off
Fri 18 Sep, 10:15am AEST
Thu 17 Sep, 8:15pm ET
AU consensus as of 17/09/2026, 12:15:05 pm
Power Comparison
DETRating +1.8
Defence by zone (EPA allowed)
BUFRating +5.3
Defence by zone (EPA allowed)
Zone cells are EPA/play vs league mean, left to right in model order. Green = better for that team. Hover a cell for the zone name.
Matchup Edges
BUF offence vs DET
deep-right passing
+0.56 EPA/play
BUF offence vs DET
short-right passing
+0.16 EPA/play
DET offence vs BUF
inside runs
+0.19 EPA/play
Market
Spread (BUF)
Open -4.5 → Now -5.5·Move -1.0Moved toward model
AU bestBUF -4.5 @ $1.90 Dabble AU
AU best (other side)DET +5.5 @ $1.90 PointsBet (AU)
Global bestBUF -4.5 @ $1.90 Dabble AU
Total
Open 53.5 → Now 54.5·Move +1.0
AU best overOver 54.5 @ $1.92 TABtouch
AU best underUnder 55.0 @ $1.85 PlayUp
Global best overOver 36.5 @ $1.05 Courtside
AU best DET ML
$2.96 SportsBet
11 AU books · 33 total · 6 snapshots
The Call
Edge noted / no bet: BUF -4.5
Model BUF +7.3 · total 52.6Spread · Analysis
BUF -4.5
$1.90 Dabble AU
Edge +2.8EDGE NOTED / NO BET
Total · Analysis
Under 55
$1.85 PlayUp
Edge +1.9PASS
The model gives Bills a 7.3-point edge over Lions, but against the market's best line of BUF -4.5 at Dabble AU (1.9) that only translates to a 2.8-point gap, noted but short of the Lean floor. This early in the season the rating still leans heavily on last year's numbers blended with the market's post-offseason view of both teams and scaled by roster continuity, with the 2026 sample so far just 1,830 plays from week one and still mostly outweighed by that prior-season and market anchor. Buffalo's deep-right passing rates at +0.56 EPA/play against Detroit's defence, the weakest zone in this matchup, but that's a model rating rather than a reason to treat this as more than an edge noted. The model's early-season record sits at 1-0 against the spread.
Secondary market interest is the total: model projects 52.6 against a market line of 55.0 (PlayUp, 1.85) for an edge of 1.9, which is a PASS. Detroit's inside runs graded at +0.19 EPA/play against Buffalo, one of the few positives for the visitors, while on last season's charting Josh Allen dropped to -0.518 EPA per dropback under pressure, both context rather than reasons to move off the model's numbers here.
Why · BUF deep-right passing (+0.56 EPA/play vs DET, DET's weakest zone)
Situational
2025 season · FTN charting via nflverse · min 40 snaps per cell (25 for box counts)
DET · 614 dropbacks
Jared Goff
Clean pocket EPA/db+0.45 (429 snaps)
Under pressure EPA/db-0.47 (185 snaps)
Pressure rate faced30%
Int-worthy rate2%
Drop rate (catchable)5%
QB-fault sack rate2%
League: +0.26 clean · -0.46 pressured
BUF defence: pressure 34% · blitz 25%
BUF · 506 dropbacks
Josh Allen
Clean pocket EPA/db+0.34 (379 snaps)
Under pressure EPA/db-0.52 (127 snaps)
Pressure rate faced25%
Int-worthy rate4%
Drop rate (catchable)6%
QB-fault sack rate4%
League: +0.26 clean · -0.46 pressured
DET defence: pressure 30% · blitz 27%
DET offence vs BUF coverage
| Shell | BUF usage | DET EPA/db | League |
|---|
| Cover 2 | 26% (138 snaps) | +0.23 (147 snaps) | 0.00 |
| Cover 3 | 22% (119 snaps) | -0.06 (190 snaps) | +0.06 |
| Cover 1 | 17% (91 snaps) | +0.15 (138 snaps) | +0.06 |
| 2-Man | 11% (58 snaps) | — | +0.07 |
| Cover 4 | 11% (58 snaps) | +0.44 (49 snaps) | +0.07 |
BUF man coverage 31% · DET vs man +0.26, vs zone +0.13
BUF offence vs DET coverage
| Shell | DET usage | BUF EPA/db | League |
|---|
| Cover 1 | 28% (178 snaps) | +0.12 (198 snaps) | +0.06 |
| Cover 3 | 28% (178 snaps) | +0.17 (148 snaps) | +0.06 |
| Cover 2 | 17% (110 snaps) | +0.21 (121 snaps) | 0.00 |
| 2-Man | 11% (69 snaps) | — | +0.07 |
| Cover 4 | 8% (48 snaps) | — | +0.07 |
DET man coverage 41% · BUF vs man +0.13, vs zone +0.24
DET tendencies
Play action rate26% · +0.27 vs +0.14 EPA (159 snaps)
RPO rate4% (42 snaps)
Screen rate10% (64 snaps)
Personnel11 62%, 12 25%, 13 5%
Def pressure / blitz / man30% / 27% / 41%
Box vs run, EPA allowedlight -0.01 (96 snaps) · neutral +0.01 (237 snaps) · heavy -0.23 (67 snaps)
BUF tendencies
Play action rate26% · +0.37 vs +0.13 EPA (152 snaps)
RPO rate7% (75 snaps)
Screen rate9% (54 snaps)
Personnel11 63%, 12 12%, 22 12%, 21 9%
Def pressure / blitz / man34% / 25% / 31%
Box vs run, EPA allowedlight +0.09 (204 snaps) · neutral -0.00 (173 snaps) · heavy +0.06 (38 snaps)
Published Model Results
2026 season · Through Week 6 · Updated 25 Oct 2026, 04:02 pm AEDT
This results panel was subsequently updated after this article was first published.
All rated analysis (W–L–P)| Coverage | Spreads | Totals |
|---|
| Week 6 | 6–3–1 | 7–3–0 |
|---|
| Season to W6 | 37–34–4 | 41–32–2 |
|---|
Includes PASS signals; UNRATED markets excluded.
Week 6 PLAY recommendations: 4–2–1 · +1.50u paper return
One unit risked per PLAY recommendation at its original published decimal price: win = price minus one, loss = minus one, push = zero. Hypothetical paper return, not actual bets. No STRONG recommendations through Week 6.
SEA-DEN: both LEAN analysis calls won; No formal betting selection. Excluded from PLAY returns.
Results source and coverageTracked Bets
2026 season graded betting log through Week 1 · last updated 17 Sept 2026, 04:44 pm
Recorded bets only. Published model selections and historical backtests are tracked separately.
Weeks 1 to 5 are published analysis-first while the current-season play sample is still small. Ratings lean more on prior-season performance, market anchors, roster continuity and supported manual adjustments until the 2026 sample grows. PLAY labels are model recommendations, not confirmation that a bet has been placed. Historical early-season backtest claims are withheld from this display unless independently verified.
Analysis only. Not financial advice. Gamble responsibly. Gambling Help Online 1800 858 858. Read our responsible gambling policy.
savvyplays.comPublished 17/09/2026V3.2