| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | #24Bridgeland (5-1) 2199 |
41% (-4) | L 30-31 | 2249 | +16.3 | −13.7 | — | −0.33 |
| 2 | @Klein Oak (2-4) 1730 |
52% (+1) | W 41-38 | 2057 | +22.1 | −0.2 | +0.55 | — |
| 3 | @Humble (1-6) 1472 |
87% (+18) | W 58-0 | 2958 | +29.0 | −29.4 | +0.20 | — |
| 5 | Conroe Caney Creek (2-4) 744 |
> 98% (+51) | W 62-13 | 2059 | +21.3 | −1.0 | +0.01 | — |
| 6 | 25% (-11) | W 39-7 | 2805 | +17.0 | −35.2 | +0.85 | — | |
| 7 | #40Willis (4-2) 2033 |
56% (+2) | W 54-14 | 3003 | +35.3 | −24.8 | +0.77 | — |
| 8 | Cleveland (2-4) 465 |
> 98% (+74) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | @Conroe (3-3) 1530 |
96% (+31) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | Conroe Grand Oaks (4-2) 1841 |
88% (+19) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | @Conroe Oak Ridge (1-5) 1070 |
> 98% (+50) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#17
was #22
Record
5-1
3-0 district
Elo
2314
#17 of 249
OVR Grade
88.9
#17 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
91.5
#7 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
89.8
#21 of 249 in 6A
Perf
2522
#9 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 13-6A
| 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 The Woodlands’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2016
15-1
Rating 812 (99th)
#2 · 2022
10-3
Rating 728 (96th)
#3 · 2017
7-2
Rating 725 (96th)
#4 · 2011
11-2
Rating 715 (95th)
#5 · 2015
10-2
Rating 714 (95th)
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.