The NFL’s 2026 schedule will be released this week, so we have the final piece of the offseason puzzle in place. We already knew each team’s opponents, but now we know the weeks and days of the week when the games will take place. Seems important in fantasy, right?
Well, yes, to a degree, but mostly, no.
For years, I wrote an article that focused on a fantasy strength-of-schedule metric that would give fantasy managers a look at which players had the best and worst slates based on the PPR fantasy points allowed (FPA) per position from the previous season. Much like the league’s actual strength of schedule based on 2025 records, it’s fun to look at but often not useful.
That’s because in recent years I’ve noticed a trend: The gap between players with the best and the worst schedules, regardless of position, has been shrinking, and this season is no different. What’s more, the information that we’re using for this research is often flawed.
Last season, the quarterback with the best schedule was Kyler Murray. He had an accumulated FPA average of 19.6 (based on the 2024 defensive stats for his '25 opponents). However, the difference between Murray’s FPA and the quarterback in the middle (16th), Bo Nix, was just 0.8 fantasy points! Well, we all know what happened to Murray: He got hurt and was demoted.
His replacement, Jacoby Brissett, did put up career numbers in Murray’s absence. But was that due to the schedule, or because he averaged the most pass attempts per game as a starter?
On the flip side, Dak Prescott, the quarterback who has the worst strength of schedule, came in at 17.8. That was a difference of only 1.8 points from the easiest schedule (Murray). Oh, and Prescott went on to finish sixth in fantasy points at quarterback, so schedule be damned!
The gap between the best and the worst fantasy schedule at running back was a bit wider (2.7 points). But the back with the “worst” schedule, Derrick Henry, still rushed for nearly 1,600 yards and finished eighth in fantasy points among all runners. So, again, schedule be damned!
At wide receiver, the difference between the most and least attractive schedules was a mere 2.1 points. What’s more, two of the three toughest schedules were played by Brian Thomas Jr. and CeeDee Lamb. While BTJ’s stats fell off a cliff, it wasn’t because of the schedule; he saw 1.3 fewer targets per game, and the Jags added Jakobi Meyers and Parker Washington emerged.
At tight end, the gap between No. 1 (Mark Andrews, 13.9) and No. 32 (Theo Johnson, 11.9) was 1.9. Once again, the difference between the best schedule and the middle slate (Mike Gesicki, 13) was only eight-tenths of a point. Let’s also remember that even though Andrews had the best schedule, he finished just 16th in fantasy points among tight ends at season’s end.
As you can see, the difference in these positions is mostly negligible and not enough (in most cases) to draft one player over another. Even at running back, which had the “biggest” gap, how much does it really matter that James Conner (24.7), who got hurt and was a bust, had a better projected strength of schedule than Henry (22.4), Gibbs (22.4), or James Cook (22.6)?
It doesn’t.
To further prove that strength-of-schedule stats are deceptive and unreliable, the data we use from the previous season often doesn’t mirror what will happen in the next season. That’s because the NFL is unpredictable, as the offseason creates a series of improvements or downgrades on the defensive side of the ball and in defensive effectiveness.
Let me give you a few examples.
In 2024, the Jets allowed an average of 16.2 points per game to quarterbacks. That made them a formidable opponent against the position. Well, New York went on to give up 20 points per game to the opposing quarterbacks in 2025, a difference of nearly four points!
This isn’t just about quarterbacks, either. We see yearly increases and decreases in fantasy points allowed data. Look at the Jaguars defense: In 2024, it allowed the second-most points to running backs, at 26.8 per game. Last season, only the Broncos allowed fewer points to the position than the Jags, at 18.7 points per game. That’s a difference of 8.1 points! So what was a super-favorable opponent based on the 2024 data was actually super unfavorable in '25.
So, you might ask, how can the schedule help fantasy managers?
Obviously, we need to know the bye weeks. That’s very important so as not to draft too many players who are off in the same week. You also might want to avoid some players with late-season byes, as you could be unable to use a star player when you’ll need him the most during a potential push to the fantasy playoffs. We’ve seen those issues for the past two years.
Managers should also look at game locations because playing in a dome or retractable-roof stadium late in the season as opposed to a cold-weather venue is an advantage (at least it can be, because predicting the weather months in advance is tougher than predicting fantasy!)
In terms of the stats that will affect the strength of schedule, that data won’t be available until we have a handle on which defenses are good or bad against each of the four main offensive skill positions. We’ll probably have a decent idea after the first month of the season, but really, it’ll take half a year of data to have a definitive fantasy baseline, and often it will be different from the previous season and from what we based on the previous season’s strength of schedule.
So, when you’re doing your in-depth draft preparations this summer, feel free to look at strength of schedule data if you’re trying to pick between two players with similar value. Just be aware that the numbers and statistics you’re using to make that determination could be (and more likely will be) far less than 100% accurate when we look back at the final results of 2026.
More NFL from Sports Illustrated
Add us as a preferred source on GoogleFollowPublished | Modified 
MICHAEL FABIANO
Michael Fabiano is a fantasy football analyst for Sports Illustrated. His weekly rankings and Start 'Em, Sit 'Em articles are must-reads for fantasy players. He is also the co-host of the Fantasy Dirt Podcast on SI. Before joining SI in August 2020, he worked for CBS Sports, NFL Network and SiriusXM. He also contributes to Westwood One Radio. Fabiano was the first fantasy analyst to appear on one of the four major TV networks and is a member of the Fantasy Sports Writers Association Hall of Fame.
Share on XFollow Michael_FabianoShare on FacebookShare on XHome/FANTASYOriginal Article
