← Back

CLASS 6A · District 9-6A

South Garland Titans

Enrollment: 1,915 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 8

Rank

#245

was #245

Record

2-4

0-3 district

Elo

442

#245 of 249

OVR Grade

60.6

#245 of 249 in 6A

OFF Grade

56.6

#246 of 249 in 6A

DEF Grade

52.7

#243 of 249 in 6A

Perf

193

#245 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk	Opponent (Rec) Elo	Proj WP%	Result	Perf	AOS	ADS	WQ	LQ
1	@Dallas Spruce	56% (+2)	W 21-20	454	−28.4	+13.4	+0.00	—
2	@Nevada Community	53% (+1)	L 7-49	-409	−38.2	+38.2	—	−1.00
3	Irving Nimitz (1-5) 325	43% (-3)	W 28-14	779	−20.6	+8.2	+0.00	—
4	@Garland Rowlett (3-3) 1384	2% (-35)	L 0-55	19	−30.9	+28.3	—	−0.88
5	North Garland (1-5) 760	26% (-10)	L 32-53	-86	−17.0	+46.4	—	−0.99
7	Garland Sachse (6-0) 1785	< 2% (-54)	L 2-61	405	−21.3	+22.5	—	−0.57
8	@Garland Lakeview Centennial (2-4) 1348	2% (-36)	—	—	—	—	—	—
9	Wylie East (4-2) 1720	< 2% (-51)	—	—	—	—	—	—
10	@Garland (2-4) 1176	4% (-29)	—	—	—	—	—	—
11	Wylie (4-2) 1571	< 2% (-45)	—	—	—	—	—	—
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 9-6A

Rk			Team (Enroll Rk)	OVR/Elo	Overall	District	PPG	PAPG	ProjRec	PO%	Bracket
1		69	Garland Sachse (3) Mustangs	80.9 1785	6-0	3-0	43.7	19.5	6.3-0.7	> 98%	D1
2		81	Wylie East (4) Raiders	79.9 1720	4-2	3-0	44.8	22.2	6.1-0.9	> 98%	D2
3		103	Wylie (1) Pirates	77.7 1571	4-2	1-2	43.3	30.8	4.5-2.5	95.7%	D1
4		146	Garland Rowlett (7) Eagles	74.8 1384	3-3	2-1	31.8	26.2	4.2-2.9	89.4%	D2
5		155	Garland Lakeview Centennial (6) Patriots	74.3 1348	2-4	1-2	25.3	28.0	3.2-3.8	9.6%	—
6		181	Garland (5) Owls	71.7 1176	2-4	1-2	17.7	36.8	2.5-4.5	6.1%	—
7		229	North Garland (2) Raiders	65.4 760	1-5	1-2	12.7	42.8	1.2-5.8	< 2%	—
8		245	South Garland (8) Titans	60.6 442	2-4	0-3	15.0	42.0	0.1-6.9	< 2%	—
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 South Garland’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2007

10-2

Rating 647 (87th)

#2 · 2005

8-5

Rating 623 (83rd)

#3 · 2010

8-4

Rating 609 (80th)

#4 · 2004

9-2

Rating 607 (79th)

#5 · 2009

8-5

Rating 592 (76th)

Team Performance History

Year	Record	Final Elo	PPG	PAPG	Margin	Elo SOS	AOS	ADS	DOM	Perf	RQ	WQ	LQ	All-Time Rating (%ile)
2025	0-9	434	4.8	49.1	−44.3	1186	−27.7	+29.8	−57.5	64	−7.88	0.00	−7.88	236(1st)
2024	3-7	830	19.2	35.8	−16.6	1225	−14.1	+15.0	−29.1	772	−5.16	+0.05	−5.21	367(9th)
2023	2-8	680	18.7	41.1	−22.4	1192	−15.3	+19.5	−34.7	631	−6.70	+0.01	−6.71	338(6th)
2022	1-9	580	12.3	46.1	−33.8	1257	−19.4	+23.9	−43.2	419	−7.68	+0.03	−7.71	293(2nd)
2021	0-10	648	14.7	59.3	−44.6	1351	−17.1	+33.3	−50.4	241	−8.45	0.00	−8.45	271(1st)
2020	2-5	928	21.1	39.7	−18.6	1325	−9.2	+15.1	−24.3	892	−4.23	+0.09	−4.32	—
2019	1-9	682	18.0	42.5	−24.5	1249	−14.2	+20.7	−34.8	629	−7.61	+0.01	−7.62	328(5th)
2018	2-8	742	22.8	37.6	−14.8	1227	−9.3	+16.6	−26.0	851	−6.26	+0.02	−6.27	363(9th)
2017	1-9	658	17.8	45.8	−28.0	1307	−15.0	+21.5	−36.6	585	−7.25	+0.04	−7.28	320(4th)
2016	0-10	675	14.9	40.2	−25.3	1364	−15.6	+15.7	−31.3	718	−7.89	0.00	−7.89	339(6th)
2015	0-3	969	18.3	44.7	−26.3	1312	−17.9	+16.2	−34.1	647	−2.55	0.00	−2.55	—
2014	0-1	1075	27.0	55.0	−28.0	1051	−11.4	+34.0	−45.4	366	−0.93	0.00	−0.93	—
2013	2-8	1161	15.7	24.5	−8.8	1490	−13.3	−3.6	−9.7	1258	−5.53	+0.11	−5.64	456(29th)
2012	7-5	1631	29.8	25.9	+3.9	1547	+0.8	−4.5	+5.3	1633	−1.57	+1.32	−2.89	558(65th)
2011	3-7	1477	23.7	28.4	−4.7	1645	−1.1	−1.1	0.0	1500	−4.15	+0.12	−4.28	520(52nd)
2010	8-4	1866	24.7	18.8	+5.9	1634	+2.3	−10.0	+12.3	1808	+0.28	+2.13	−1.85	609(80th)
2009	8-5	1777	19.2	18.4	+0.8	1714	−1.1	−11.1	+10.0	1750	−0.08	+2.24	−2.32	592(76th)
2008	5-6	1614	26.4	31.0	−4.6	1680	+3.1	−0.2	+3.3	1582	−2.12	+0.80	−2.92	544(60th)
2007	10-2	1979	30.3	17.1	+13.2	1629	+7.9	−11.4	+19.3	1982	+1.82	+2.90	−1.08	647(87th)
2006	4-7	1554	24.1	26.8	−2.7	1613	−1.2	−3.3	+2.2	1555	−3.38	+0.46	−3.85	537(58th)
2005	8-5	1898	22.3	17.2	+5.2	1714	+1.5	−12.5	+14.0	1850	+0.06	+2.16	−2.10	623(83rd)
2004	9-2	1780	31.3	18.1	+13.2	1546	+7.8	−7.6	+15.5	1887	+0.76	+2.09	−1.33	607(79th)
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.