← Back
CLASS 6A · District 17-6A

Sheldon CE King Panthers

Enrollment: 3,659 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 3
Rank
#7
was #7
Record
0-0
0-0 district
Elo
2509
#7 of 249
OVR Grade
91.8
#7 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
DEF Grade
Perf

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf WQ LQ
1
Conroe (0-0) 1483
> 98% (+41)
2
@#31Cy Ranch (0-0) 2039
88% (+19)
3 82% (+14)
4
Humble Kingwood (0-0) 1718
96% (+32)
5
Crosby (0-0) 1478
> 98% (+41)
6
@#12Humble Atascocita (0-0) 2401
61% (+4)
7
Humble (0-0) 1449
> 98% (+42)
9 28% (-9)
10
@#5Humble Summer Creek (0-0) 2589
42% (-3)
11
Channelview (0-0) 1063
> 98% (+58)
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 17-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 1
Mustangs
95.2
2731
0-0 0-0 6.1-0.9 > 98% D1
2 5
Bulldogs
93
2589
0-0 0-0 5.6-1.4 > 98% D1
3 7
Panthers
91.8
2509
0-0 0-0 5.2-1.8 > 98% D2
4 12
Eagles
90.2
2401
0-0 0-0 4.8-2.2 97% D2
5 70
Mustangs
79.9
1718
0-0 0-0 2.5-4.4 3.9%
6 122
Cougars
76.3
1478
0-0 0-0 1.7-5.3 < 2%
7 134
Wildcats
75.8
1449
0-0 0-0 1.6-5.4 < 2%
8 200
Falcons
70
1063
0-0 0-0 0.4-6.6 < 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 Sheldon CE King’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2025
13-3
Rating 811 (99th)
#2 · 2022
9-5
Rating 723 (96th)
#3 · 2021
10-3
Rating 722 (96th)
#4 · 2023
9-4
Rating 692 (93rd)
#5 · 2020
8-4
Rating 665 (90th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo
PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS
AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 13-3 2478 50.1 24.5 +25.6 1947 +28.5 −15.5 +44.1 2602 +6.29 +6.54 −0.25 811(99th)
2024 5-5 2004 31.1 25.8 +5.3 1858 +9.4 −10.9 +20.3 2008 +0.30 +1.40 −1.10 650(88th)
2023 9-4 2049 40.5 23.0 +17.5 1798 +17.9 −12.2 +30.0 2251 +1.86 +2.30 −0.44 692(93rd)
2022 9-5 2231 36.6 22.7 +13.9 1908 +17.0 −13.8 +30.9 2272 +2.44 +2.94 −0.50 723(96th)
2021 10-3 2243 37.8 18.0 +19.8 1892 +18.1 −18.0 +36.1 2402 +3.29 +3.44 −0.14 722(96th)
2020 8-4 1969 41.0 21.2 +19.8 1772 +15.8 −13.6 +29.4 2236 +1.64 +2.92 −1.29 665(90th)
2019 7-4 1630 25.8 18.6 +7.2 1577 −1.4 −12.0 +10.6 1765 −0.88 +0.93 −1.80 566(67th)
2018 8-3 1629 36.1 36.0 +0.1 1537 +6.9 +5.1 +1.8 1545 −0.17 +0.83 −1.00 536(57th)
2017 3-6 1284 28.2 31.7 −3.4 1629 +1.1 +0.1 +1.0 1525 −2.68 +0.29 −2.97 502(45th)
2016 1-8 1030 13.1 49.0 −35.9 1713 −11.6 +16.9 −28.5 787 −4.97 +0.01 −4.99 380(11th)
2009 1-0 1316 40.0 19.0 +21.0 767 +3.6 +7.1 −3.4 1414 +0.01 +0.01 0.00
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.