← Back
CLASS 6A · District 24-6A

Cedar Park Timberwolves

Enrollment: 2,304 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 6
Rank
#49
was #49
Record
0-0
0-0 district
Elo
1896
#49 of 249
OVR Grade
82.6
#49 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
—
DEF Grade
—
Perf
—

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf WQ LQ
1
A&M Consolidated
 62% (+5) — — — —
2
San Antonio Clark (0-0) 1399
 89% (+20) — — — —
3
@#48Waco Midway (0-0) 1907
 49% (0) — — — —
4
New Braunfels
 69% (+8) — — — —
5
Leander (0-0) 803
 > 98% (+44) — — — —
6
@Leander Rouse (0-0) 1250
 94% (+26) — — — —
7
Hutto (0-0) 1693
 70% (+8) — — — —
8
@#23Austin Vandegrift (0-0) 2164
 25% (-11) — — — —
9
Georgetown East View (0-0) 1173
 95% (+29) — — — —
10
@Cedar Park Vista Ridge (0-0) 1601
 77% (+12) — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 24-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 23
Vipers
86.6
2164
0-0 0-0 — — 5.5-0.5 > 98% D2
2 49
Timberwolves
82.6
1896
0-0 0-0 — — 4.6-1.4 > 98% D2
3 76
Hippos
79.5
1693
0-0 0-0 — — 3.8-2.2 93.1% D1
4 91
Rangers
78.1
1601
0-0 0-0 — — 3.3-2.7 85.1% D1
5 174
Raiders
72.8
1250
0-0 0-0 — — 1.9-4.1 14.6% —
6 184
Patriots
71.7
1173
0-0 0-0 — — 1.6-4.4 8.1% —
7 228
Lions
66.1
803
0-0 0-0 — — 0.4-5.6 < 2% —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

Since 2004

Historical Performance

Shaded band is the 6A league mean Elo ± 1 standard deviation for that season; the dashed gray line is the league mean. The four colored dashed lines mark the Elo needed that season to rank Top 10 / 25 / 50 / 100 among all qualifying 6A team-seasons (min. 8 games) — a rough gauge of how Cedar Park’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2004
11-3
Rating 653 (88th)
#2 · 2009
7-4
Rating 613 (81st)
#3 · 2007
6-4
Rating 608 (80th)
#4 · 2008
6-5
Rating 608 (80th)
#5 · 2006
9-3
Rating 574 (70th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 0-2 1833 24.5 43.5 −19.0 2140 +9.4 +5.6 +3.9 1596 −0.63 0.00 −0.63 —
2024 1-1 1793 46.0 45.5 +0.5 2197 +28.3 +2.3 +26.1 2152 +0.16 +0.81 −0.65 —
2023 2-1 1740 24.7 24.0 +0.7 1671 +5.0 −4.6 +9.6 1739 +0.43 +0.50 −0.07 —
2022 0-3 1681 7.0 34.3 −27.3 2080 −7.1 −3.6 −3.4 1414 −1.14 0.00 −1.14 —
2021 1-2 2055 17.7 23.3 −5.7 2129 +5.3 −16.0 +21.3 2033 −0.04 +0.50 −0.53 —
2020 2-0 2272 24.5 10.5 +14.0 1956 +9.4 −24.3 +33.7 2342 +1.23 +1.23 0.00 —
2019 3-1 2167 29.5 17.2 +12.2 1706 +1.6 −13.2 +14.8 1869 +1.02 +1.19 −0.17 —
2018 2-2 2120 23.0 24.5 −1.5 1957 +1.1 −11.5 +12.6 1816 +0.44 +1.21 −0.77 —
2017 1-0 2202 38.0 7.0 +31.0 1874 +20.0 −32.0 +52.0 2800 +0.34 +0.34 0.00 —
2016 2-0 2215 28.0 6.5 +21.5 1905 +9.0 −27.6 +36.7 2416 +1.08 +1.08 0.00 —
2015 2-0 2087 49.0 11.5 +37.5 1189 +16.0 −10.8 +26.8 2169 +0.44 +0.44 0.00 —
2014 2-0 2067 33.5 12.0 +21.5 1510 +7.6 −13.5 +21.1 2027 +0.36 +0.36 0.00 —
2013 3-1 2064 37.2 22.2 +15.0 1684 +8.9 −13.7 +22.7 2066 +0.86 +1.40 −0.54 —
2012 2-2 1916 10.8 11.8 −1.0 1962 −5.7 −19.1 +13.4 1835 +0.06 +0.80 −0.74 —
2011 3-1 1967 38.0 9.2 +28.8 1584 +11.5 −16.3 +27.8 2196 +0.01 +0.67 −0.66 —
2010 4-0 2082 42.5 5.5 +37.0 1621 +18.6 −24.6 +43.2 2580 +1.06 +1.06 0.00 —
2009 7-4 1958 31.5 25.5 +6.0 1728 +7.8 −6.9 +14.7 1868 +0.40 +2.34 −1.95 613(81st)
2008 6-5 1842 26.4 21.6 +4.7 1752 +5.3 −10.2 +15.5 1886 −0.69 +2.01 −2.70 608(80th)
2007 6-4 1737 28.3 18.2 +10.1 1693 +6.5 −11.4 +18.0 1949 −0.75 +1.80 −2.55 608(80th)
2006 9-3 1719 23.8 20.2 +3.5 1628 +1.7 −7.3 +9.0 1724 +0.67 +2.32 −1.65 574(70th)
2005 5-5 1634 20.6 18.4 +2.2 1506 −4.5 −7.9 +3.5 1587 −2.56 +1.34 −3.90 551(62nd)
2004 11-3 2049 24.6 14.9 +9.6 1597 +2.3 −12.6 +14.9 1873 +1.34 +3.02 −1.68 653(88th)
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com
Margin — Average scoring margin (PPG minus PAPG).
Elo SOS — Average Elo of opponents faced that season, using each opponent's final season Elo.
AOS — Adjusted Offensive Scoring — scoring output compared to the expected average team's offensive performance, adjusted for opponents' defensive strength.
ADS — Adjusted Defensive Scoring — scoring allowed compared to the expected average defensive team's performance, adjusted for opponents' offensive strength; lower (more negative) is better.
DOM — Dominance — AOS minus ADS, combined scoring-margin efficiency.
Perf — Performance Elo — that season's DOM translated onto the Elo scale, an independent check on Elo itself.
RQ — Resume Quality — net wins above a second-round-quality opponent (WQ + LQ) for the season. Typically runs about −10 to +10: 0 is a break-even resume against that bar, the median qualifying season sits around −1, and +5 or better is an elite, deep-playoff-caliber resume.
WQ — Win Quality — resume credit earned from wins only, weighted by opponent strength. Each win's credit is benchmarked against a hypothetical ~1850 Elo opponent (roughly a second-round-playoff-quality team) — beating a team stronger than that earns close to full credit, beating a much weaker team earns very little.
LQ — Loss Quality — resume cost from losses only, weighted by opponent strength.
All-Time Rating — 0–990 composite score ranked against every qualifying 6A team-season since 2004; parenthetical is the all-time percentile.