← Back

CLASS 6A · District 12-6A

Copperas Cove Bulldawgs

Enrollment: 2,307 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 3

Rank

#106

was #107

Record

5-2

3-0 district

Elo

1566

#106 of 249

OVR Grade

77.6

#106 of 249 in 6A

OFF Grade

81

#69 of 249 in 6A

DEF Grade

73.4

#139 of 249 in 6A

Perf

1665

#98 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk	Opponent (Rec) Elo	Proj WP%	Result	Perf	AOS	ADS	WQ	LQ
1	Killeen Ellison	57% (+3)	W 49-27	1775	+15.5	+4.5	+0.09	—
2	Round Rock Cedar Ridge (7-0) 1852	44% (-2)	L 35-42	1845	+13.2	−0.6	—	−0.80
3	Hutto (5-2) 1894	19% (-14)	L 21-64	1187	−2.6	+10.0	—	−0.61
4	@Round Rock Westwood (1-6) 1059	60% (+4)	W 49-15	1892	+13.8	−1.8	+0.08	—
5	@Temple (1-6) 1448	36% (-5)	W 35-28	1649	+1.0	−5.0	+0.25	—
6	Bryan (1-6) 760	96% (+31)	W 56-14	1719	+9.3	+0.5	+0.01	—
7	@Killeen Chaparral (2-4) 920	93% (+25)	W 49-20	1592	+9.5	+5.9	+0.02	—
9	#39Waco Midway (6-1) 2038	12% (-19)	—	—	—	—	—	—
10	@Killeen Harker Heights (4-2) 1909	19% (-14)	—	—	—	—	—	—
11	Lake Belton (3-3) 1596	47% (-1)	—	—	—	—	—	—
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 12-6A

Rk			Team (Enroll Rk)	OVR/Elo	Overall	District	PPG	PAPG	ProjRec	PO%	Bracket
1		39	Waco Midway (1) Panthers	84.7 2038	6-1	3-0	36.4	15.6	5.5-0.5	> 98%	D1
2		54	Killeen Harker Heights (5) Knights	82.8 1909	4-2	2-0	37.2	39.5	5.2-0.8	> 98%	D2
3		106	Copperas Cove (3) Bulldawgs	77.6 1566	5-2	3-0	42.0	30.0	3.8-2.2	> 98%	D1
4		100	Lake Belton (6) Broncos	78.1 1596	3-3	0-2	33.5	35.2	3.1-2.9	78.3%	D2
5		134	Temple (2) Wildcats	75.8 1448	1-6	0-3	28.4	41.3	2.2-3.8	20.9%	—
6		213	Killeen Chaparral (7) Bobcats	67.9 920	2-4	1-1	21.8	31.2	1.2-4.8	< 2%	—
7		228	Bryan (4) Vikings	65.4 760	1-6	0-3	20.0	41.3	0.1-5.9	< 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 Copperas Cove’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2008

13-2

Rating 707 (94th)

#2 · 2005

13-1

Rating 695 (93rd)

#3 · 2004

10-2

Rating 649 (87th)

#4 · 2010

9-2

Rating 622 (83rd)

#5 · 2011

10-2

Rating 622 (83rd)

Team Performance History

Year	Record	Final Elo	PPG	PAPG	Margin	Elo SOS	AOS	ADS	DOM	Perf	RQ	WQ	LQ	All-Time Rating (%ile)
2025	6-5	1336	28.3	33.5	−5.2	1533	+0.2	+2.8	−2.6	1434	−1.54	+0.52	−2.06	500(44th)
2024	3-7	1350	30.2	40.2	−10.0	1395	−2.2	+11.2	−13.4	1165	−5.01	+0.48	−5.50	466(32nd)
2023	2-8	1004	23.8	37.3	−13.5	1353	−10.6	+8.1	−18.7	1034	−6.03	+0.31	−6.34	420(20th)
2022	2-8	1126	20.3	40.4	−20.1	1576	−6.6	+9.5	−16.1	1097	−5.06	+0.13	−5.19	433(23rd)
2021	1-9	1081	24.5	54.7	−30.2	1603	−1.5	+22.9	−24.4	889	−5.98	+0.12	−6.10	397(14th)
2020	1-7	1096	17.6	36.6	−19.0	1618	−8.9	+5.2	−14.0	1149	−4.63	+0.05	−4.68	429(22nd)
2019	3-7	1465	29.2	36.5	−7.3	1498	+0.3	+7.9	−7.5	1311	−4.29	+0.33	−4.62	489(40th)
2018	7-4	1856	33.4	30.6	+2.7	1671	+7.6	−2.2	+9.8	1744	+0.22	+1.80	−1.57	582(73rd)
2017	5-6	1590	27.1	29.7	−2.6	1739	+3.4	−2.0	+5.4	1636	−1.16	+1.29	−2.46	546(61st)
2016	4-5	1395	26.0	26.8	−0.8	1629	−2.3	−3.8	+1.6	1539	−2.23	+0.77	−3.00	514(49th)
2015	3-8	1501	30.3	43.5	−13.3	1844	+7.8	+8.0	−0.2	1496	−3.16	+0.42	−3.58	528(55th)
2014	7-4	1839	37.1	33.5	+3.5	1758	+14.0	−1.0	+15.0	1874	+0.64	+1.85	−1.21	603(78th)
2013	6-5	1643	44.4	36.2	+8.2	1609	+13.9	+2.9	+11.0	1776	−1.66	+0.54	−2.19	569(68th)
2012	7-4	1852	39.6	20.0	+19.6	1589	+10.6	−10.3	+20.9	2023	−0.67	+1.24	−1.90	621(83rd)
2011	10-2	1911	44.2	24.2	+20.0	1577	+16.8	−2.0	+18.9	1972	+1.77	+2.59	−0.82	622(83rd)
2010	9-2	1851	38.0	17.5	+20.5	1535	+8.8	−10.4	+19.1	1978	+1.29	+1.95	−0.67	622(83rd)
2009	8-3	1766	31.8	19.5	+12.3	1482	+4.0	−8.3	+12.3	1808	−0.50	+1.41	−1.91	587(74th)
2008	13-2	2258	37.5	15.3	+22.2	1583	+11.5	−14.8	+26.3	2157	+3.19	+4.09	−0.91	707(94th)
2007	4-0	2151	47.0	8.8	+38.2	1276	+17.0	−11.5	+28.6	2214	+0.69	+0.69	0.00	—
2006	3-1	2133	26.8	10.8	+16.0	1501	+4.2	−10.8	+15.1	1876	−0.32	+0.42	−0.74	—
2005	13-1	2211	36.6	17.0	+19.6	1643	+15.1	−10.0	+25.1	2129	+3.98	+4.06	−0.08	695(93rd)
2004	10-2	1890	32.4	15.6	+16.8	1579	+9.6	−10.4	+20.0	2000	+1.15	+2.23	−1.07	649(87th)
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.