← Back
CLASS 6A · District 17-6A

Humble Kingwood Mustangs

Enrollment: 2,838 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 7
Rank
#95
was #79
Record
3-4
1-3 district
Elo
1639
#95 of 249
OVR Grade
78.7
#95 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
79.1
#81 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
74.1
#133 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1620
#102 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
1
@Clear Creek (1-5) 1150
 92% (+23) W 35-6 1891 +1.3 −14.3 +0.05 —
2
Clear Falls (3-3) 1637
 57% (+3) W 42-31 1828 +12.3 −0.9 +0.32 —
3
#30Deer Park (6-0) 2095
 30% (-8) L 7-45 1282 −6.2 +2.5 — −0.34
4
@#6Sheldon CE King (6-1) 2580
 5% (-29) L 28-63 1914 +21.0 +4.5 — −0.07
5
@Channelview (0-7) 780
 > 98% (+38) W 66-17 1761 +13.4 +2.9 +0.01 —
6
#13Humble Summer Creek (4-3) 2373
 7% (-25) L 2-57 1055 −6.6 +11.1 — −0.10
7
Crosby (4-3) 1793
 50% (0) L 29-37 1611 +6.0 +1.6 — −0.64
9
@#16Humble Atascocita (4-3) 2319
 5% (-27) — — — — — —
10
Humble (1-6) 1472
 67% (+7) — — — — — —
11
@#3Galena Park North Shore (7-0) 2816
 < 2% (-47) — — — — — —
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
Mustangs
96.5
2816
 7-0 4-0 35.3 9.3 6.7-0.3 > 98% D1
2 6
Panthers
92.9
2580
 6-1 4-0 53.7 14.1 6-1 > 98% D2
3 13
Bulldogs
89.8
2373
 4-3 3-1 38.0 16.1 4.8-2.2 96.3% D1
4 16
Eagles
89
2319
 4-3 2-2 29.0 20.3 4.3-2.7 93.2% D2
5 68
Cougars
81
1793
 4-3 2-2 29.1 29.9 3-4 10% —
6 95
Mustangs
78.7
1639
 3-4 1-3 29.9 36.6 1.7-5.3 < 2% —
7 126
Wildcats
76.2
1472
 1-6 0-4 15.9 43.1 1.5-5.5 < 2% —
8 227
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 Kingwood’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2024
9-5
Rating 624 (83rd)
#2 · 2015
6-5
Rating 602 (78th)
#3 · 2013
7-4
Rating 589 (75th)
#4 · 2025
5-5
Rating 582 (73rd)
#5 · 2012
4-6
Rating 573 (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 5-5 1729 32.4 34.6 −2.2 1780 +7.5 −2.3 +9.8 1745 −0.68 +0.55 −1.23 582(73rd)
2024 9-5 1927 31.0 28.4 +2.6 1756 +8.0 −6.6 +14.6 1864 +1.89 +2.69 −0.80 624(83rd)
2023 3-7 1424 15.6 34.3 −18.7 1794 −6.0 −1.0 −5.1 1373 −2.71 +0.29 −3.00 511(48th)
2022 5-5 1510 20.0 28.9 −8.9 1819 −1.4 −6.9 +5.5 1637 −0.88 +0.60 −1.48 548(62nd)
2021 1-9 1299 11.8 36.8 −25.0 1902 −9.4 −0.6 −8.8 1281 −3.87 +0.09 −3.96 486(39th)
2020 2-7 1414 12.8 34.8 −22.0 1813 −11.4 −2.9 −8.5 1289 −2.91 +0.41 −3.33 485(38th)
2019 5-6 1417 29.7 25.7 +4.0 1420 −1.6 −2.0 +0.5 1511 −2.87 +0.18 −3.05 511(49th)
2018 7-4 1654 27.2 16.5 +10.7 1445 −4.3 −10.9 +6.7 1667 −0.66 +0.77 −1.43 560(65th)
2017 6-6 1683 22.1 28.8 −6.8 1651 −2.7 −2.5 −0.2 1495 −1.80 +0.92 −2.72 543(60th)
2016 6-6 1554 24.6 24.1 +0.5 1599 −2.2 −6.2 +4.0 1601 −2.14 +0.68 −2.82 542(59th)
2015 6-5 1743 23.4 26.8 −3.5 1903 +5.1 −8.2 +13.3 1832 +0.41 +1.20 −0.78 602(78th)
2014 3-7 1508 23.0 30.1 −7.1 1778 +3.5 −2.9 +6.4 1661 −2.84 +0.53 −3.37 546(61st)
2013 7-4 1736 32.3 30.0 +2.3 1774 +10.1 −3.1 +13.2 1829 +0.67 +2.15 −1.48 589(75th)
2012 4-6 1685 31.9 34.6 −2.7 1788 +7.1 −1.7 +8.8 1721 −1.19 +1.43 −2.62 573(70th)
2011 6-4 1678 26.4 29.4 −3.0 1615 +2.5 +0.2 +2.3 1558 +0.12 +1.18 −1.07 546(61st)
2010 3-8 1401 23.0 33.1 −10.1 1718 −0.4 +1.5 −1.9 1453 −3.34 +0.35 −3.69 508(47th)
2009 6-6 1502 15.8 16.6 −0.7 1581 −7.0 −8.4 +1.4 1536 −1.92 +1.38 −3.31 539(59th)
2008 4-5 1331 22.7 23.9 −1.2 1491 −2.1 −0.4 −1.7 1457 −2.69 +0.65 −3.34 502(45th)
2007 3-8 1312 23.4 31.3 −7.9 1526 −0.2 +6.5 −6.7 1332 −5.20 +0.28 −5.48 485(38th)
2006 7-4 1544 29.5 25.2 +4.3 1485 +3.0 0.0 +2.9 1574 −1.71 +1.41 −3.12 544(60th)
2005 3-5 1324 13.2 23.9 −10.6 1592 −9.0 −2.6 −6.4 1340 −3.07 +0.23 −3.30 488(40th)
2004 3-7 1496 17.3 21.6 −4.3 1515 −5.9 −3.2 −2.6 1435 −4.24 +0.84 −5.08 519(52nd)
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.