← Back

CLASS 6A · District 28-6A

San Antonio Roosevelt Rough Riders

Enrollment: 2,379 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 7

Rank

#135

was #135

Record

0-0

0-0 district

Elo

1442

#135 of 249

OVR Grade

75.7

#135 of 249 in 6A

OFF Grade

—

DEF Grade

—

Perf

—

Schedule & Results

Wk	Opponent (Rec) Elo	Proj WP%	Result	Perf	WQ	LQ
1	@Schertz Clemens (0-0) 1372	57% (+3)	—	—	—	—
2	@San Antonio East Central (0-0) 1378	57% (+3)	—	—	—	—
3	San Antonio Jay	66% (+6)	—	—	—	—
5	@San Antonio Madison (0-0) 1302	64% (+6)	—	—	—	—
6	San Antonio Lee (0-0) 625	97% (+33)	—	—	—	—
7	@#27San Antonio Johnson (0-0) 2140	5% (-28)	—	—	—	—
8	@San Antonio Brandeis (0-0) 1625	32% (-7)	—	—	—	—
9	San Antonio Clark (0-0) 1399	54% (+2)	—	—	—	—
10	@San Antonio Reagan (0-0) 1685	27% (-10)	—	—	—	—
11	San Antonio Churchill (0-0) 1132	79% (+12)	—	—	—	—
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 28-6A

Rk			Team (Enroll Rk)	OVR/Elo	Overall	District	PPG	PAPG	ProjRec	PO%	Bracket
1		27	San Antonio Johnson (2) Jaguars	86.3 2140	0-0	0-0	—	—	6.6-0.4	> 98%	D1
2		79	San Antonio Reagan (1) Rattlers	79.4 1685	0-0	0-0	—	—	4.9-2.1	92.4%	D1
3		87	San Antonio Brandeis (4) Broncos	78.5 1625	0-0	0-0	—	—	4.6-2.4	87.7%	D2
4		135	San Antonio Roosevelt (7) Rough Riders	75.7 1442	0-0	0-0	—	—	3.6-3.4	55.7%	D2
5		146	San Antonio Clark (3) Cougars	75.1 1399	0-0	0-0	—	—	3.3-3.7	39.1%	—
6		166	San Antonio Madison (6) Mavericks	73.6 1302	0-0	0-0	—	—	2.8-4.2	20.1%	—
7		192	San Antonio Churchill (8) Chargers	71 1132	0-0	0-0	—	—	1.9-5.1	5.2%	—
8		243	San Antonio Lee (5) Volunteers	63.4 625	0-0	0-0	—	—	0.3-6.7	< 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 Roosevelt’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2009

7-4

Rating 606 (79th)

#2 · 2020

7-4

Rating 601 (78th)

#3 · 2010

7-4

Rating 593 (76th)

#4 · 2012

9-3

Rating 590 (75th)

#5 · 2008

7-4

Rating 588 (74th)

Team Performance History

Year	Record	Final Elo	PPG	PAPG	Margin	Elo SOS	AOS	ADS	DOM	Perf	RQ	WQ	LQ	All-Time Rating (%ile)
2025	3-7	1145	25.9	39.9	−14.0	1406	−3.1	+14.1	−17.2	1069	−4.54	+0.18	−4.72	434(23rd)
2024	2-8	998	19.6	36.0	−16.4	1433	−9.0	+10.2	−19.1	1022	−5.99	+0.20	−6.19	414(18th)
2023	6-4	1307	27.9	28.9	−1.0	1217	−4.0	+8.0	−12.0	1200	−2.41	+0.29	−2.70	470(33rd)
2022	4-6	1290	27.8	33.5	−5.7	1378	−0.8	+10.2	−11.0	1225	−3.89	+0.15	−4.03	465(32nd)
2021	5-5	1604	25.6	30.4	−4.8	1456	−0.8	+5.7	−6.5	1338	−1.98	+0.39	−2.36	504(46th)
2020	7-4	1918	29.1	21.5	+7.5	1620	+5.8	−6.3	+12.1	1803	+0.82	+2.12	−1.30	601(78th)
2019	9-2	1756	39.1	23.2	+15.9	1431	+11.6	−2.6	+14.1	1854	+0.95	+1.84	−0.88	587(74th)
2018	4-6	1269	20.7	20.8	−0.1	1472	−7.6	−5.1	−2.5	1438	−3.66	+0.47	−4.12	488(40th)
2017	3-7	1228	21.2	42.2	−21.0	1642	−5.2	+9.3	−14.5	1137	−3.93	+0.19	−4.12	445(26th)
2016	4-6	1418	26.4	35.1	−8.7	1622	+3.0	+6.0	−3.0	1425	−2.45	+0.47	−2.92	501(44th)
2015	4-6	1439	26.8	31.5	−4.7	1642	−1.0	−2.3	+1.2	1531	−2.32	+0.51	−2.82	516(51st)
2014	0-10	961	15.5	39.2	−23.7	1624	−8.5	+10.8	−19.3	1017	−6.80	0.00	−6.80	405(16th)
2013	3-7	1316	21.4	32.6	−11.2	1665	−4.6	−0.6	−4.0	1399	−3.46	+0.14	−3.60	489(40th)
2012	9-3	1879	28.2	23.4	+4.8	1558	+2.2	−5.2	+7.4	1685	+0.97	+2.16	−1.20	590(75th)
2011	2-8	1380	15.5	24.6	−9.1	1713	−7.5	−6.2	−1.3	1467	−4.20	+0.35	−4.55	507(47th)
2010	7-4	1782	24.9	19.5	+5.5	1697	+2.3	−11.3	+13.6	1840	−0.06	+1.69	−1.76	593(76th)
2009	7-4	1905	27.6	20.8	+6.8	1656	+7.9	−6.5	+14.3	1858	+0.40	+2.63	−2.23	606(79th)
2008	7-4	1721	27.5	21.2	+6.4	1672	+6.4	−7.2	+13.6	1840	+0.05	+1.68	−1.62	588(74th)
2007	5-5	1768	24.9	28.6	−3.7	1691	+2.5	−2.6	+5.1	1627	−0.63	+1.03	−1.66	566(67th)
2006	5-5	1559	16.0	18.5	−2.5	1644	−6.7	−10.8	+4.1	1603	−1.54	+1.12	−2.66	545(60th)
2005	4-6	1416	20.6	19.4	+1.2	1609	−0.8	−6.0	+5.3	1631	−2.84	+0.41	−3.25	536(57th)
2004	6-4	1595	24.1	17.8	+6.3	1479	−0.6	−7.0	+6.4	1660	−1.34	+0.64	−1.98	560(65th)
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.