| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | @Prosper Rock Hill (3-3) 1541 |
73% (+10) | L 13-19 | 1334 | −13.2 | −6.5 | — | −0.84 |
| 2 | South Grand Prairie (4-2) 1730 |
34% (-6) | L 31-36 | 1502 | +7.8 | +7.7 | — | −0.61 |
| 3 | Fort Worth Haltom (3-3) 1404 |
77% (+12) | W 21-12 | 1721 | −5.1 | −13.9 | +0.07 | — |
| 4 | @Arlington Lamar (3-3) 1461 |
55% (+2) | W 29-23 | 1575 | −0.9 | −3.9 | +0.21 | — |
| 5 | Granbury (2-4) 838 |
96% (+31) | W 41-35 | 1002 | −5.8 | +14.1 | +0.02 | — |
| 7 | 24% (-11) | L 7-45 | 1215 | −4.6 | +6.8 | — | −0.43 | |
| 8 | 17% (-15) | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
| 9 | Arlington (4-2) 1558 |
53% (+1) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | @Weatherford (4-2) 1393 |
69% (+8) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | Arlington Sam Houston (3-3) 813 |
96% (+31) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#101
was #92
Record
3-3
2-1 district
Elo
1586
#101 of 249
OVR Grade
77.9
#101 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
72.4
#151 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
74.4
#128 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1391
#140 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 3-6A
| 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 Arlington Bowie’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2007
12-2
Rating 726 (96th)
#2 · 2012
11-2
Rating 697 (94th)
#3 · 2008
11-2
Rating 677 (91st)
#4 · 2009
11-3
Rating 667 (90th)
#5 · 2011
9-4
Rating 658 (89th)
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.






