Seattle Seahawks @ Denver Broncos

New: reusable weekly intelligence dashboard

The new Week-N view reads dated QB and team-rushing forecast packets when their source checks pass. It supports choosing any scheduled game; it will show "not yet issued" until the first automated publication.

Open weekly matchup dashboard →

QB projections vs market reference

Frozen Week-4 equations, conditional on the named QBs starting. Not Week-5-informed forecasts.

Team rushing attempts — Seattle vs Denver

RUN-006L Week-6 box-score reconstruction, provisional. These are newly calculated for this exact Thursday matchup, using the frozen 40% offensive last-eight + 20% opponent-allowed last-eight + 40% historical league baseline. NFLverse Week-5 event-by-event reconciliation remains pending; this is not a certified automated model issuance or sportsbook edge.

RUN-006L threshold probabilities

Higher-tail probabilities mean reaching at least the named number. Lower-tail probabilities mean finishing with that many or fewer. Team non-kneel rushing attempts include QB scrambles; these cannot be multiplied directly by an RB called-rush share.

Sources and cutoff: 2025 and 2026 Weeks 1–4 nflverse play-by-play; Week-5 October 11 box-score rushing totals reconstructed as SEA 26 / SF 24 and DEN 29 / LAC 34; original frozen RUN-006L 2025 league priors. Week-5 event-level source not yet cross-checked for any kneels or rush-attempt coding differences. SF @ SEA box score · DEN @ LAC box score. This research remains EXPLORATORY; no demonstrated automatic betting edge.

Week 6 individual RB workload and yardage scenarios — Seattle at Denver

New numerical calculations, dated October 13. This is a conditional research reconstruction from Week 5 final box scores and pregame 2025–2026 regular-season history. It is not the formally issued frozen RUN-013A/RUN-007 player model, and player participation has not been certified. The carries column assumes the named back plays with his recent four-team-game called-rush share intact.

The two rushing-yard columns are alternative efficiency assumptions, not statistical confidence bounds. The left uses the back's observed Week 2–5 yards per carry; the right uses the average of his offense's and opposing defense's previous-eight-game called-rush YPC. RUN-007's original fitted efficiency model and availability adjustment are not independently reproduced, so neither is represented as an official RUN-007 forecast. The biggest uncertainty is Wilson's environment-efficiency assumption: 3.49 personal YPC vs 4.34 matchup-environment YPC.

Team called-rush opportunity — different from the RUN-006L rushing ladder

Called rushes exclude QB scrambles and kneels. The RUN-006L team attempts table above includes scrambles; its values were not multiplied by RB share. The historical RUN-013C shadow equation uses intercept 9.98027831, offense prior-eight coefficient 0.36059682, defense allowed prior-eight coefficient 0.22960130, and expected-margin coefficient 0.11859765. Its source spread assumption is Seattle favored by 2.5 points, taken from an October 12 media-reported opening line — not an executable current quote.

Coverage and limitation: The 2025 regular-season games and 2026 Weeks 1–4 came from the existing NFLverse PBP source. October 11 Week 5 player totals came from SF at SEA and DEN at LAC box scores. The central calculation excludes every Week 5 QB rushing attempt (SEA 1; DEN 4; SF 5; LAC 6) because the box score does not identify which were scrambles versus called QB runs; this can change the denominator. Sensitivity to reclassifying those Week 5 QB plays changes the predicted team called-rush counts by approximately Seattle 25.84–26.06, Denver 22.65–22.97, before any backfield, role or spread changes. Week 5 event-level NFLverse reconciliation and game-day inactive verification are still required.

Research assessment: PASS / no bet issued. RUN-013B found the 2025 sportsbook carries markets outperformed our football forecast, and RUN-007's historical 28.56-yard MAE does not establish any player rushing-yards betting edge. A change in role, injury, script or true rushing efficiency could invalidate these scenarios. Do not confuse the two yardage columns with a measured confidence interval or line-price disagreement.

Next Gen rushing — useful tracking context

Why this matters: RUN-026 and RUN-029 found that expected rushing yards per tracking-eligible attempt (xRY/att) captures some repeatable player, offensive-system and opposing-defense carry difficulty. RUN-035 found that adding NGS environment ratings did not materially improve the established individual rushing-yards forecast. NGS belongs here as matchup explanation and a challenge to our assumptions, not an automatic yardage adjustment.

2026 regular season through Week 5. Published NFL Next Gen Stats via nflverse, reproduced on dated League Station player pages (Wilson page updated Oct 13, Dobbins Oct 12). These public season summaries have not yet been reconciled with our automated NGS weekly source. They are historical information, not Seattle–Denver predictions.

Source records: Wilson — NGS player profile and Dobbins — NGS player profile. RYOE is actual gain relative to tracking-model expectation. Negative is under expectation, but it does not isolate pure runner skill. 8+ box = share of tracked carries against eight or more defenders at the snap. Time to LOS = seconds reaching the line. NGS efficiency is distance traveled / yards gained; lower means more direct, not necessarily better production.

Interpretation worth betting attention

Dobbins' changing context: His published 2025 RYOE/attempt was +1.08 (36.6% 8+ box), compared with −0.76 so far in 2026 (18.8% 8+ box). That is a notable year-to-year efficiency change despite fewer stacked boxes. It does not establish that today's line is wrong; role, defensive quality, blocking, small-sample noise and carry geometry all matter. Wilson is also below expected yards so far, but his workload is much more important to the final yards range than a direct −0.66-yard penalty per carry.

Most useful next to the player numbers: the offensive xRY environment, opposing defensive xRY carry difficulty, defensive negative-play/TFL creation, and 10+ explosive-run suppression — already represented separately in the RUN-034C report immediately below. We should not double-count the same defensive mechanisms as independent evidence.

Methodology safeguard: RUN-026 discovered that approximately 21.8% of NGS weekly records use fewer model-eligible attempts than official carries when calculating RYOE. Consequently, we must not calculate xRY/att as expected_rush_yards divided by official rush_attempts. The future automated NGS section will use RUN-026's corrected implied denominator, exclude current-season week-0 aggregates, and never treat a missing qualifying NGS week as zero. NGS player-week rows generally require 10+ attempts. Research status: tracking context KEEP; additional RB-yards betting edge UNPROVEN/NEGATIVE.

RUN-034C rushing environment

Archived Week-5 profiles; NGS through Week 4, PBP through Week 3. Percentile is relative to the research comparison group, not a league rank or probability. Higher = better on each named axis: offense creates more favorable runs; defense makes running harder.

Quick reading guide: 0–19 = bottom fifth · 20–39 = below average · 40–59 = middle · 60–79 = above average · 80–100 = top fifth. These are broad descriptive bands, not official rankings or validated betting thresholds.

Important: 98.44 percentile does not mean 98.44% of runs are stopped, and 100 does not mean no back can gain yards. These profiles are archived, not refreshed Week-6 ratings. RUN-035 did not establish improved player rushing-yard forecasts from these overlays.

Frozen team environment

Mixed cutoffs: opportunity through Week 3, scoring through Week 4.

Football questions to investigate

Dobbins carries

Does Denver's changing play-calling lower total designed rushing opportunity, or does Dobbins retain ~57% share? Failure case for an Under: close script and normal late workload.

Emanuel Wilson usage

How much does Seattle's redistributed backfield and recent fumbling affect his leash? Failure case for an Over: reduced snaps, pass-heavy script, or alternate back usage.

Passing and total

Monitor Denver secondary health, Seattle's defensive injuries, short fields and explosive plays. Pressure alone does not justify passing-yards Unders.

What is missing for a usable price comparison?

Current player prop lines and odds · fully refreshed Week-6 QB/RB forecasts · exact-opponent Week-6 rushing ladder · confirmed late personnel · current weather.

Those gaps are displayed rather than guessed. The scanner still needs the automatic refresh-to-projection and reference-price integration.