| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Richmond Tomas |
86% (+17) | W 38-14 | 1373 | −4.5 | +0.5 | +0.01 | — |
| 2 | @Tomball Memorial (1-5) 1362 |
32% (-7) | L 36-42 | 999 | −0.3 | +19.7 | — | −0.85 |
| 3 | Clear Springs (2-4) 1518 |
18% (-15) | W 14-13 | 1362 | −13.9 | −8.3 | +0.25 | — |
| 5 | Richmond Foster (2-4) 1233 |
45% (-2) | W 28-14 | 1481 | −3.0 | −2.3 | +0.10 | — |
| 6 | #25Cy Ranch (5-1) 2165 |
6% (-27) | L 10-56 | 1179 | +1.6 | +14.4 | — | −0.30 |
| 7 | 3% (-33) | L 8-49 | 1249 | −5.7 | +4.3 | — | −0.19 | |
| 8 | @Cy Springs (2-4) 1559 |
30% (-8) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | #47Fulshear (5-1) 1966 |
7% (-24) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | @Cy Park (1-5) 782 |
92% (+23) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | #50Waller (5-1) 1950 |
8% (-24) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#153
was #157
Record
3-3
1-2 district
Elo
1355
#153 of 249
OVR Grade
74.4
#153 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
72
#156 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
71
#169 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1274
#159 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 Richmond George Ranch’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2016
6-5
Rating 586 (74th)
#2 · 2020
5-3
Rating 568 (68th)
#3 · 2017
5-4
Rating 555 (64th)
#4 · 2019
5-7
Rating 543 (60th)
#5 · 2023
9-3
Rating 540 (59th)
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.