| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | @Dayton |
28% (-9) | W 45-15 | 2232 | +16.6 | −12.6 | +0.35 | — |
| 2 | 31% (-8) | L 20-45 | 1588 | +2.3 | −1.2 | — | −0.49 | |
| 3 | Fort Bend Marshall |
45% (-2) | W 34-14 | 2030 | +6.6 | −14.6 | +0.30 | — |
| 4 | #3Galena Park North Shore (7-0) 2816 |
< 2% (-41) | L 0-58 | 1281 | −0.3 | +8.4 | — | −0.02 |
| 5 | 4% (-30) | L 3-45 | 1739 | −4.0 | −13.5 | — | −0.07 | |
| 6 | Channelview (0-7) 780 |
98% (+37) | W 65-3 | 2086 | +12.4 | −11.1 | +0.01 | — |
| 7 | @Humble Kingwood (3-4) 1639 |
50% (+0) | W 37-29 | 1811 | +7.1 | −5.4 | +0.36 | — |
| 9 | #13Humble Summer Creek (4-3) 2373 |
8% (-23) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | #16Humble Atascocita (4-3) 2319 |
10% (-21) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | @Humble (1-6) 1472 |
79% (+13) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#68
was #78
Record
4-3
2-2 district
Elo
1793
#68 of 249
OVR Grade
81
#68 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
79.1
#82 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
81.1
#65 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1824
#72 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 17-6A
| Rk | Team (Enroll Rk) | OVR/ |
Overall | District | PPG | PAPG | ProjRec | PO% | Bracket | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | |||||||||||
| ProjRec, PO%, and Bracket represent the result of 10,000 Monte Carlo season simulations from this point forward based on each team's current Elo | |||||||||||
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 Crosby’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
Team Performance History
| Year | Record | Final Elo |
PPG | PAPG | Margin | Elo SOS |
AOS | ADS | DOM | Perf | RQ | WQ | LQ | All-Time Rating (%ile) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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.