| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pasadena Sam Rayburn (1-6) 637 |
5% (-27) | L 0-50 | -651 | −44.8 | +41.2 | — | −0.98 |
| 2 | @Cleveland (2-4) 465 |
29% (-9) | L 0-42 | -513 | −44.9 | +35.6 | — | −1.00 |
| 3 | @Conroe Caney Creek (2-4) 744 |
10% (-21) | L 7-48 | -191 | −33.7 | +34.0 | — | −0.99 |
| 5 | Aldine Nimitz (3-3) 1518 |
< 2% (-51) | L 0-61 | -149 | −28.4 | +37.6 | — | −0.85 |
| 6 | @Aldine Davis (5-1) 1655 |
< 2% (-58) | L 0-49 | 356 | −25.6 | +20.1 | — | −0.74 |
| 7 | Aldine MacArthur (4-2) 943 |
4% (-31) | L 0-34 | 185 | −37.4 | +15.2 | — | −0.98 |
| 8 | @Spring Dekaney (3-3) 1327 |
< 2% (-47) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | #49Spring Westfield (4-2) 1956 |
< 2% (-72) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | Aldine Eisenhower (3-3) 1292 |
< 2% (-46) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | @Spring (2-4) 1061 |
2% (-37) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#249
was #249
Record
0-6
0-3 district
Elo
143
#249 of 249
OVR Grade
56.1
#249 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
49.8
#249 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
49
#248 of 249 in 6A
Perf
-160
#249 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 14-6A
| 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 Aldine’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2009
7-5
Rating 555 (63rd)
#2 · 2004
6-4
Rating 537 (58th)
#3 · 2007
4-6
Rating 526 (54th)
#4 · 2006
6-5
Rating 517 (51st)
#5 · 2005
4-6
Rating 508 (47th)
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.