← Back

CLASS 6A · District 29-6A

San Antonio Holmes Huskies

Enrollment: 2,239 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 9

Rank

#242

was #242

Record

0-0

0-0 district

Elo

629

#242 of 249

OVR Grade

63.5

#242 of 249 in 6A

OFF Grade

—

DEF Grade

—

Perf

—

Schedule & Results

Wk	Opponent (Rec) Elo	Proj WP%	Result	Perf	WQ	LQ
1	@Laredo Martin	53% (+1)	—	—	—	—
2	@San Antonio MacArthur	58% (+3)	—	—	—	—
3	San Antonio Sotomayor (0-0) 1431	3% (-32)	—	—	—	—
4	@San Antonio O'Connor (0-0) 1010	17% (-15)	—	—	—	—
6	#38San Antonio Brennan (0-0) 1958	< 2% (-53)	—	—	—	—
7	@San Antonio Stevens (0-0) 925	22% (-12)	—	—	—	—
8	San Antonio Warren (0-0) 1057	14% (-17)	—	—	—	—
9	@San Antonio Marshall (0-0) 670	46% (-2)	—	—	—	—
10	#35San Antonio Harlan (0-0) 1967	< 2% (-54)	—	—	—	—
11	@San Antonio Taft (0-0) 1164	10% (-21)	—	—	—	—
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 29-6A

Rk			Team (Enroll Rk)	OVR/Elo	Overall	District	PPG	PAPG	ProjRec	PO%	Bracket
1		35	San Antonio Harlan (1) Hawks	83.6 1967	0-0	0-0	—	—	7.3-0.7	> 98%	D1
2		38	San Antonio Brennan (2) Bears	83.5 1958	0-0	0-0	—	—	7.3-0.7	> 98%	D1
3		139	San Antonio Sotomayor (3) Wildcats	75.6 1431	0-0	0-0	—	—	5.4-2.5	92.3%	D2
4		187	San Antonio Taft (4) Raiders	71.5 1164	0-0	0-0	—	—	4.1-3.9	54%	D2
5		201	San Antonio Warren (6) Warriors	69.9 1057	0-0	0-0	—	—	3.5-4.5	26%	—
6		207	San Antonio O’Connor (7) Panthers	69.2 1010	0-0	0-0	—	—	3.2-4.8	17.2%	—
7		217	San Antonio Stevens (8) Falcons	67.9 925	0-0	0-0	—	—	2.7-5.3	9.4%	—
8		239	San Antonio Marshall (5) Rams	64.1 670	0-0	0-0	—	—	1.3-6.7	< 2%	—
9		242	San Antonio Holmes (9) Huskies	63.5 629	0-0	0-0	—	—	1.1-6.9	< 2%	—
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

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 San Antonio Holmes’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2021

5-5

Rating 491 (41st)

#2 · 2012

4-6

Rating 458 (30th)

#3 · 2010

3-7

Rating 451 (28th)

#4 · 2011

4-6

Rating 448 (27th)

#5 · 2016

5-5

Rating 417 (19th)

Team Performance History

Year	Record	Final Elo	PPG	PAPG	Margin	Elo SOS	AOS	ADS	DOM	Perf	RQ	WQ	LQ	All-Time Rating (%ile)
2025	1-9	508	15.2	46.0	−30.8	1237	−19.1	+22.2	−41.3	468	−7.27	+0.01	−7.28	297(2nd)
2024	1-9	529	22.7	47.8	−25.1	1277	−9.8	+25.0	−34.9	628	−7.50	+0.01	−7.51	320(4th)
2023	1-9	592	22.8	51.7	−28.9	1255	−7.6	+30.0	−37.5	562	−7.50	+0.02	−7.52	320(4th)
2022	0-10	570	9.5	41.0	−31.5	1296	−21.5	+16.7	−38.2	544	−8.38	0.00	−8.38	309(3rd)
2021	5-5	1284	26.8	24.1	+2.7	1396	−4.3	−2.8	−1.5	1462	−3.04	+0.31	−3.34	491(41st)
2020	1-7	790	11.9	36.4	−24.5	1539	−13.7	+8.6	−22.3	942	−4.81	+0.09	−4.89	373(10th)
2019	0-10	674	2.6	37.0	−34.4	1559	−20.8	+11.6	−32.4	689	−7.06	0.00	−7.06	335(5th)
2018	1-9	843	17.0	35.0	−18.0	1545	−8.6	+8.4	−17.0	1075	−6.04	+0.06	−6.10	402(15th)
2017	2-8	773	17.3	35.4	−18.1	1256	−15.1	+12.2	−27.3	817	−6.59	+0.13	−6.72	362(9th)
2016	5-5	1158	22.9	35.1	−12.2	1251	−8.9	+12.1	−21.1	973	−3.34	+0.21	−3.56	417(19th)
2015	4-6	932	29.1	35.7	−6.6	1261	−4.7	+12.7	−17.5	1063	−4.27	+0.14	−4.41	408(17th)
2014	0-10	540	11.1	37.5	−26.4	1343	−19.1	+14.3	−33.4	665	−8.04	0.00	−8.04	320(4th)
2013	0-10	744	10.1	48.8	−38.7	1440	−18.7	+22.0	−40.7	482	−7.63	0.00	−7.63	315(4th)
2012	4-6	1113	30.9	36.4	−5.5	1423	+1.3	+9.4	−8.0	1299	−4.27	+0.41	−4.68	458(30th)
2011	4-6	1158	19.2	23.6	−4.4	1260	−10.0	+3.1	−13.1	1172	−4.16	+0.14	−4.30	448(27th)
2010	3-7	1008	35.2	34.8	+0.4	1280	+5.8	+14.0	−8.2	1296	−5.56	+0.20	−5.75	451(28th)
2009	2-8	780	23.6	40.4	−16.8	1292	−5.8	+20.3	−26.1	848	−6.34	+0.05	−6.39	370(10th)
2008	1-9	679	18.5	42.1	−23.6	1350	−10.7	+20.0	−30.6	734	−7.24	+0.00	−7.24	346(7th)
2007	1-9	744	9.0	38.4	−29.4	1360	−17.1	+17.2	−34.3	644	−7.25	+0.32	−7.57	342(6th)
2006	2-8	1012	17.9	36.6	−18.7	1383	−8.9	+12.7	−21.6	959	−6.14	+0.06	−6.20	409(17th)
2005	3-7	1019	22.8	36.2	−13.4	1296	−4.0	+15.8	−19.7	1006	−5.71	+0.15	−5.86	416(19th)
2004	2-8	949	18.2	42.1	−23.9	1266	−11.4	+21.3	−32.7	681	−6.95	+0.03	−6.99	369(10th)
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.