← Back

CLASS 6A · District 17-6A

Humble Wildcats

Enrollment: 2,922 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 5

Rank

#126

was #127

Record

1-6

0-4 district

Elo

1472

#126 of 249

OVR Grade

76.2

#126 of 249 in 6A

OFF Grade

75.7

#114 of 249 in 6A

DEF Grade

75.3

#117 of 249 in 6A

Perf

1532

#116 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk	Opponent (Rec) Elo	Proj WP%	Result	Perf	AOS	ADS	WQ	LQ
1	Klein Cain (4-2) 1818	20% (-13)	L 41-42	1838	+14.6	+1.1	—	−0.57
2	@Klein Forest (1-6) 1176	68% (+7)	W 45-13	1744	+5.0	−4.7	+0.08	—
3	#17The Woodlands (5-1) 2314	13% (-18)	L 0-58	980	−12.8	+8.0	—	−0.39
4	@#16Humble Atascocita (4-3) 2319	< 2% (-40)	L 7-43	1414	−2.0	+1.4	—	−0.07
5	@#13Humble Summer Creek (4-3) 2373	2% (-35)	L 12-35	1855	+3.4	−10.9	—	−0.11
6	#3Galena Park North Shore (7-0) 2816	< 2% (-53)	L 0-41	1706	−0.3	−8.6	—	−0.02
7	@#6Sheldon CE King (6-1) 2580	< 2% (-44)	L 6-70	1189	−1.0	+11.5	—	−0.05
9	Channelview (0-7) 780	95% (+28)	—	—	—	—	—	—
10	@Humble Kingwood (3-4) 1639	33% (-7)	—	—	—	—	—	—
11	Crosby (4-3) 1793	21% (-13)	—	—	—	—	—	—
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 17-6A

Rk			Team (Enroll Rk)	OVR/Elo	Overall	District	PPG	PAPG	ProjRec	PO%	Bracket
1		3	Galena Park North Shore (1) Mustangs	96.5 2816	7-0	4-0	35.3	9.3	6.7-0.3	> 98%	D1
2		6	Sheldon CE King (3) Panthers	92.9 2580	6-1	4-0	53.7	14.1	6-1	> 98%	D2
3		13	Humble Summer Creek (2) Bulldogs	89.8 2373	4-3	3-1	38.0	16.1	4.8-2.2	96.3%	D1
4		16	Humble Atascocita (4) Eagles	89 2319	4-3	2-2	29.0	20.3	4.3-2.7	93.2%	D2
5		68	Crosby (8) Cougars	81 1793	4-3	2-2	29.1	29.9	3-4	10%	—
6		95	Humble Kingwood (7) Mustangs	78.7 1639	3-4	1-3	29.9	36.6	1.7-5.3	< 2%	—
7		126	Humble (5) Wildcats	76.2 1472	1-6	0-4	15.9	43.1	1.5-5.5	< 2%	—
8		227	Channelview (6) Falcons	65.7 780	0-7	0-4	12.0	57.4	0-7	< 2%	—
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 Humble’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2005

6-4

Rating 593 (76th)

#2 · 2007

9-3

Rating 589 (75th)

#3 · 2004

5-5

Rating 581 (72nd)

#4 · 2019

10-3

Rating 573 (70th)

#5 · 2006

7-3

Rating 567 (68th)

Team Performance History

Year	Record	Final Elo	PPG	PAPG	Margin	Elo SOS	AOS	ADS	DOM	Perf	RQ	WQ	LQ	All-Time Rating (%ile)
2025	3-7	1420	17.4	31.2	−13.8	1790	−9.7	−8.4	−1.3	1467	−2.73	+0.20	−2.93	518(52nd)
2024	5-5	1602	22.7	30.7	−8.0	1728	−2.2	−3.7	+1.5	1538	−0.34	+0.81	−1.15	539(58th)
2023	4-6	1420	23.8	28.7	−4.9	1780	+0.3	−5.0	+5.4	1634	−1.60	+0.56	−2.16	544(60th)
2022	5-5	1486	23.3	33.3	−10.0	1881	+3.1	−2.4	+5.5	1638	−0.59	+0.82	−1.42	552(63rd)
2021	2-8	1189	13.3	38.1	−24.8	1716	−9.5	+4.6	−14.1	1148	−4.06	+0.15	−4.21	441(25th)
2020	3-7	1311	17.8	36.3	−18.5	1661	−9.8	+2.6	−12.4	1189	−3.25	+0.23	−3.48	453(29th)
2019	10-3	1644	36.2	15.8	+20.4	1236	+1.4	−6.8	+8.3	1706	−0.23	+1.24	−1.47	573(70th)
2018	5-5	1104	34.5	29.4	+5.1	1155	−1.8	+8.0	−9.8	1256	−3.26	+0.12	−3.38	449(28th)
2016	1-0	1329	42.0	18.0	+24.0	1045	+9.2	−1.0	+10.2	1755	+0.02	+0.02	0.00	—
2015	1-1	1283	16.0	18.5	−2.5	1218	−10.9	−3.2	−7.7	1306	−0.86	+0.01	−0.88	—
2014	2-0	1356	17.0	4.5	+12.5	1082	−17.8	−12.8	−5.0	1374	+0.13	+0.13	0.00	—
2013	0-1	1191	19.0	22.0	−3.0	1189	−18.2	−1.9	−16.4	1091	−0.95	0.00	−0.95	—
2012	0-1	1243	13.0	21.0	−8.0	921	−26.3	+8.2	−34.5	637	−0.92	0.00	−0.92	—
2011	1-2	1324	25.0	18.0	+7.0	1250	−7.5	−8.9	+1.3	1533	−1.71	+0.02	−1.74	—
2010	2-0	1400	28.0	13.0	+15.0	968	−9.0	−7.7	−1.3	1467	+0.07	+0.07	0.00	—
2009	3-7	1300	16.0	27.9	−11.9	1523	−7.9	+2.8	−10.6	1234	−4.23	+0.88	−5.11	469(33rd)
2008	7-3	1696	23.7	25.4	−1.7	1578	+0.4	−1.5	+1.9	1548	−0.19	+1.35	−1.54	553(63rd)
2007	9-3	1771	19.1	13.2	+5.8	1448	−6.5	−11.0	+4.5	1613	−0.54	+1.19	−1.73	589(75th)
2006	7-3	1697	28.8	18.2	+10.6	1387	+0.6	−6.2	+6.8	1670	−1.37	+1.23	−2.60	567(68th)
2005	6-4	1739	25.2	20.4	+4.8	1686	+3.3	−8.9	+12.2	1806	−0.33	+1.19	−1.52	593(76th)
2004	5-5	1729	26.4	24.4	+2.0	1677	+5.4	−4.3	+9.7	1742	−1.38	+0.97	−2.35	581(72nd)
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.