← Back
CLASS 6A · District 27-6A

Converse Judson Rockets

Enrollment: 2,483 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 5
Rank
#120
was #112
Record
2-3
2-1 district
Elo
1513
#120 of 249
OVR Grade
76.8
#120 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
85
#40 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
66.1
#201 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1597
#106 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
2
Hutto (5-2) 1894
 31% (-8) L 41-67 1612 +17.4 +13.0 — −0.68
3
@Austin Bowie (5-1) 1816
 24% (-11) L 27-58 1178 +5.0 +17.9 — −0.66
4
Schertz Clemens (4-2) 1479
 27% (-10) W 51-41 1710 +19.7 +11.3 +0.26 —
5
@Converse Wagner (1-4) 1053
 85% (+16) W 56-27 1815 +19.6 +7.0 +0.04 —
7
San Antonio Pieper (3-3) 1642
 41% (-4) L 42-43 1669 +9.7 +2.9 — −0.72
8
@#20Cibolo Steele (4-1-1) 2221
 5% (-28) — — — — — —
9
San Marcos (0-6) 1254
 75% (+10) — — — — — —
10
San Antonio East Central (5-1) 1731
 29% (-9) — — — — — —
11
@New Braunfels Canyon (3-3) 1358
 66% (+6) — — — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 27-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 20
Knights
87.5
2221
 4-1 3-0 46.5 23.5 6.8-0.2 > 98% D1
2 76
Hornets
80.1
1731
 5-1 3-0 32.8 16.5 5.3-1.7 > 98% D1
3 94
Warriors
78.7
1642
 3-3 2-1 40.3 36.2 4.8-2.2 92.5% D2
4 120
Rockets
76.8
1513
 2-3 2-1 43.4 47.2 3.8-3.2 77.8% D2
5 125
Buffaloes
76.3
1479
 4-2 1-2 32.0 30.3 3-4 17.3% —
6 152
Cougars
74.5
1358
 3-3 1-2 14.3 20.7 2.4-4.6 10.2% —
7 169
Rattlers
72.9
1254
 0-6 0-3 15.5 40.0 1.4-5.7 2.6% —
8 202
Thunderbirds
69.9
1053
 1-4 0-3 21.6 34.8 0.7-6.3 < 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 Converse Judson’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2018
11-1
Rating 789 (98th)
#2 · 2015
13-2
Rating 751 (97th)
#3 · 2017
10-2
Rating 749 (97th)
#4 · 2019
12-2
Rating 743 (97th)
#5 · 2016
9-3
Rating 725 (96th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 4-7 1389 18.5 29.1 −10.5 1595 −7.4 −0.9 −6.4 1339 −4.10 +0.59 −4.69 491(41st)
2024 4-6 1420 25.7 26.8 −1.1 1491 −5.1 −3.7 −1.4 1465 −3.48 +0.59 −4.07 512(49th)
2023 4-8 1563 26.0 27.7 −1.7 1694 −1.1 −6.7 +5.6 1639 −3.19 +0.41 −3.60 554(63rd)
2022 6-6 1717 31.9 30.9 +1.0 1789 +9.1 −4.1 +13.2 1830 −0.85 +1.51 −2.37 601(78th)
2021 4-6 1836 27.5 28.8 −1.3 1909 +8.3 −5.9 +14.2 1855 −0.43 +2.16 −2.59 612(80th)
2020 5-3 2086 32.9 25.6 +7.2 1924 +13.9 −10.8 +24.7 2117 +1.28 +2.32 −1.04 667(90th)
2019 12-2 2380 47.4 21.6 +25.8 1787 +24.3 −12.8 +37.1 2427 +4.48 +4.74 −0.26 743(97th)
2018 11-1 2501 48.1 15.2 +32.9 1846 +24.9 −19.2 +44.1 2603 +5.05 +5.10 −0.04 789(98th)
2017 10-2 2440 47.8 22.7 +25.2 1871 +26.6 −12.4 +39.0 2474 +4.03 +4.21 −0.18 749(97th)
2016 9-3 2277 38.1 20.9 +17.2 1922 +18.4 −16.1 +34.5 2361 +3.35 +3.69 −0.34 725(96th)
2015 13-2 2389 34.1 16.9 +17.2 1909 +12.3 −20.3 +32.6 2314 +5.87 +6.02 −0.15 751(97th)
2014 10-5 2239 36.1 22.4 +13.7 1891 +18.1 −10.2 +28.3 2208 +3.29 +4.34 −1.04 717(95th)
2013 11-3 2179 45.4 22.6 +22.8 1782 +22.6 −12.1 +34.7 2367 +3.33 +3.74 −0.41 719(95th)
2012 8-4 1954 33.0 24.1 +8.9 1698 +9.4 −6.1 +15.5 1888 +0.81 +1.80 −0.99 613(81st)
2011 8-3 2012 34.5 16.7 +17.8 1713 +12.0 −12.5 +24.5 2113 +1.67 +2.74 −1.07 655(88th)
2010 7-5 1769 29.5 24.4 +5.1 1765 +7.6 −7.2 +14.8 1870 −0.57 +2.38 −2.95 608(80th)
2009 9-3 1881 36.1 24.8 +11.3 1387 +8.1 +1.0 +7.2 1679 +0.59 +1.58 −0.99 580(72nd)
2008 8-3 1966 34.0 13.2 +20.8 1414 +6.8 −9.7 +16.6 1914 −0.39 +0.93 −1.32 635(85th)
2007 11-5 2242 25.8 18.1 +7.7 1806 +5.3 −14.4 +19.6 1991 +2.86 +5.34 −2.48 698(94th)
2006 6-4 1801 23.6 17.4 +6.2 1692 +1.7 −12.1 +13.9 1846 −0.49 +1.44 −1.93 602(78th)
2005 10-5 2067 24.9 14.0 +10.9 1755 +6.0 −16.3 +22.4 2059 +1.16 +3.29 −2.13 681(92nd)
2004 13-1 2132 37.3 12.6 +24.6 1653 +15.8 −15.1 +31.0 2274 +3.71 +3.88 −0.17 709(95th)
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.