| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | #20Cibolo Steele (4-1-1) 2221 |
8% (-24) | L 21-52 | 1472 | +2.3 | +3.5 | — | −0.15 |
| 2 | 26% (-10) | L 0-63 | 798 | −11.1 | +16.9 | — | −0.43 | |
| 3 | Laredo United (3-2-1) 1549 |
66% (+6) | T 0-0 | 1572 | −24.0 | −26.9 | — | — |
| 5 | @San Antonio Brandeis (3-3) 1461 |
58% (+3) | W 35-20 | 1765 | +7.3 | −3.3 | +0.20 | — |
| 6 | San Antonio Churchill (1-5) 1096 |
91% (+22) | W 45-7 | 1993 | +1.7 | −18.0 | +0.05 | — |
| 7 | @San Antonio Madison (4-2) 1423 |
73% (+9) | W 21-9 | 1726 | −2.3 | −11.3 | +0.17 | — |
| 8 | San Antonio Lee (3-3) 836 |
98% (+36) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | 9% (-22) | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
| 10 | San Antonio Roosevelt (3-3) 1374 |
82% (+15) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | @San Antonio Clark (1-5) 1197 |
91% (+22) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#74
was #84
Record
3-2-1
3-0 district
Elo
1744
#74 of 249
OVR Grade
80.3
#74 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
71.9
#157 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
80.6
#68 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1554
#113 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 28-6A
| 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 San Antonio Reagan’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2013
11-1
Rating 682 (92nd)
#2 · 2014
11-2
Rating 677 (91st)
#3 · 2020
9-2
Rating 675 (91st)
#4 · 2011
12-2
Rating 672 (91st)
#5 · 2008
11-3
Rating 664 (90th)
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.