← Back
CLASS 6A · District 22-6A

Katy Taylor Mustangs

Enrollment: 3,337 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 5
Rank
#112
was #114
Record
5-2
3-2 district
Elo
1540
#112 of 249
OVR Grade
77.2
#112 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
72.1
#153 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
79.2
#82 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1522
#119 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
1
@Conroe Oak Ridge (1-5) 1070
 30% (-8) W 21-14 1464 −10.2 −8.7 +0.07 —
2
@Fort Bend Austin (1-6) 869
 64% (+6) W 38-19 1675 +6.6 −0.4 +0.03 —
3
@Katy Mayde Creek (1-5) 1114
 38% (-5) W 35-13 1720 −1.9 −10.7 +0.09 —
4
Katy Tompkins (3-3) 1870
 23% (-11) L 12-29 1405 −10.7 −6.9 — −0.72
5
@Katy Jordan (4-2) 1745
 7% (-25) L 6-45 908 −15.8 +7.9 — −0.43
6
Katy Cinco Ranch (3-3) 1510
 13% (-18) W 36-13 2143 +11.6 −14.2 +0.38 —
7
@Katy Seven Lakes (0-6) 1008
 89% (+20) W 31-17 1339 −7.8 −1.4 +0.03 —
8
Katy Morton Ranch (2-4) 1216
 80% (+13) — — — — — —
9
@Katy Paetow (2-4) 1511
 53% (+1) — — — — — —
10
#5Katy (7-0) 2587
 < 2% (-42) — — — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 22-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 5
Tigers
93
2587
 7-0 5-0 46.4 11.6 8-0 > 98% D1
2 57
Falcons
82.2
1870
 3-3 3-1 29.0 30.3 6.6-1.4 > 98% D2
3 73
Warriors
80.3
1745
 4-2 3-2 33.7 26.0 5.6-2.4 97.7% D1
4 112
Mustangs
77.2
1540
 5-2 3-2 25.6 21.4 4.3-3.7 66.1% D2
5 123
Cougars
76.8
1510
 3-3 3-2 23.5 27.0 4.3-3.7 28.8% —
6 121
Panthers
76.8
1511
 2-4 2-2 21.8 27.7 3.5-4.5 8% —
7 173
Mavericks
72.3
1216
 2-4 1-3 19.0 37.2 2-6 < 2% —
8 190
Rams
70.8
1114
 1-5 0-4 21.8 40.0 1.2-6.8 < 2% —
9 205
Spartans
69.2
1008
 0-6 0-4 15.0 42.5 0.6-7.4 < 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 Katy Taylor’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2019
9-6
Rating 638 (86th)
#2 · 2020
8-3
Rating 629 (84th)
#3 · 2009
6-4
Rating 598 (77th)
#4 · 2018
6-6
Rating 577 (71st)
#5 · 2004
6-4
Rating 564 (67th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 0-10 959 19.1 41.5 −22.4 1536 −8.9 +11.3 −20.2 995 −7.28 0.00 −7.28 407(16th)
2024 2-8 1108 13.3 29.9 −16.6 1537 −13.1 +1.9 −15.0 1125 −4.96 +0.08 −5.04 439(24th)
2023 5-6 1406 20.0 25.0 −5.0 1461 −8.6 −2.4 −6.2 1345 −3.37 +0.78 −4.14 499(44th)
2022 3-7 1243 20.7 33.5 −12.8 1661 −5.4 +1.1 −6.5 1337 −3.59 +0.32 −3.90 475(35th)
2021 2-8 1376 19.9 46.1 −26.2 1773 −2.9 +11.9 −14.8 1130 −3.72 +0.10 −3.82 460(31st)
2020 8-3 2016 29.8 21.3 +8.5 1725 +7.3 −11.0 +18.3 1958 +1.24 +2.03 −0.80 629(84th)
2019 9-6 2084 28.6 31.4 −2.8 1809 +7.5 −3.6 +11.1 1778 +0.89 +2.53 −1.64 638(86th)
2018 6-6 1681 18.5 19.0 −0.5 1709 −6.3 −15.7 +9.4 1736 −1.37 +1.26 −2.63 577(71st)
2017 6-4 1685 20.0 23.0 −3.0 1548 −5.3 −6.2 +0.8 1520 −0.63 +0.67 −1.30 548(62nd)
2016 9-3 1677 34.1 29.2 +4.9 1546 +6.8 −0.1 +6.9 1673 +0.32 +1.74 −1.42 564(66th)
2015 4-6 1299 22.1 23.6 −1.5 1496 −3.7 −2.1 −1.6 1460 −3.35 +0.17 −3.52 493(42nd)
2014 8-4 1532 22.8 23.8 −1.0 1490 −4.3 −4.9 +0.5 1513 −0.65 +0.91 −1.55 534(57th)
2013 2-8 1165 13.5 26.5 −13.0 1702 −7.0 −2.7 −4.3 1393 −4.24 +0.05 −4.29 475(35th)
2012 1-9 1101 24.2 40.4 −16.2 1673 −0.9 +7.0 −7.9 1302 −5.01 +0.04 −5.05 457(30th)
2011 1-9 1130 11.7 34.4 −22.7 1699 −8.8 +4.8 −13.6 1160 −5.53 +0.04 −5.56 444(26th)
2010 6-6 1614 22.5 28.9 −6.4 1588 −4.4 −2.2 −2.2 1445 −1.74 +0.95 −2.69 535(57th)
2009 6-4 1626 29.2 14.2 +15.0 1540 +3.9 −11.8 +15.7 1892 −1.12 +0.42 −1.54 598(77th)
2008 8-5 1714 19.7 22.5 −2.8 1597 −3.1 −6.0 +3.0 1574 −1.01 +1.77 −2.78 562(66th)
2007 4-6 1407 19.8 23.7 −3.9 1515 −5.1 −2.8 −2.2 1444 −3.43 +0.50 −3.94 509(48th)
2006 5-6 1392 17.0 19.5 −2.5 1580 −5.4 −5.3 −0.1 1496 −2.88 +0.54 −3.42 514(50th)
2005 4-5 1533 15.8 16.6 −0.8 1512 −7.8 −8.1 +0.3 1508 −2.52 +0.86 −3.38 536(57th)
2004 6-4 1650 19.6 16.4 +3.2 1511 −1.9 −6.6 +4.7 1618 −1.11 +1.00 −2.11 564(67th)
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.