| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | @Fort Bend Hightower (5-2) 1828 |
77% (+11) | W 24-7 | 2416 | +8.3 | −28.3 | +0.40 | — |
| 2 | #6Sheldon CE King (6-1) 2580 |
14% (-17) | W 31-28 | 2864 | +24.0 | −30.5 | +0.94 | — |
| 3 | Aldine Nimitz (3-3) 1518 |
96% (+30) | W 52-7 | 2501 | +23.6 | −16.4 | +0.15 | — |
| 5 | #24Bridgeland (5-1) 2199 |
66% (+6) | L 14-31 | 1849 | +0.3 | −13.7 | — | −0.31 |
| 6 | @Richmond George Ranch (3-3) 1355 |
94% (+27) | W 56-10 | 2474 | +25.4 | −13.6 | +0.12 | — |
| 7 | #47Fulshear (5-1) 1966 |
49% (0) | W 24-7 | 2440 | +9.9 | −27.7 | +0.72 | — |
| 8 | @Cy Park (1-5) 782 |
> 98% (+55) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | #50Waller (5-1) 1950 |
71% (+9) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | @Richmond Foster (2-4) 1233 |
> 98% (+37) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | Cy Springs (2-4) 1559 |
93% (+24) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#25
was #36
Record
5-1
2-1 district
Elo
2165
#25 of 249
OVR Grade
86.6
#25 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
85.7
#31 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
93.5
#8 of 249 in 6A
Perf
2424
#15 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 23-6A
| 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 Cy Ranch’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2018
11-1
Rating 691 (93rd)
#2 · 2014
13-3
Rating 689 (93rd)
#3 · 2016
11-1
Rating 671 (90th)
#4 · 2015
10-2
Rating 670 (90th)
#5 · 2025
10-3
Rating 665 (90th)
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.