| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | San Antonio Harlan (5-1) 1927 |
67% (+7) | W 42-7 | 2865 | +24.1 | −30.5 | +0.63 | — |
| 3 | 83% (+15) | L 25-35 | 1697 | +0.3 | −7.5 | — | −0.50 | |
| 4 | Killeen Harker Heights (4-2) 1909 |
63% (+5) | W 62-28 | 2596 | +30.7 | −13.2 | +0.59 | — |
| 5 | @Austin Akins (1-5) 282 |
> 98% (+72) | W 75-0 | 1824 | +12.0 | −1.0 | +0.00 | — |
| 6 | Buda Johnson (2-5) 1279 |
98% (+35) | W 49-21 | 1891 | +12.1 | −3.6 | +0.08 | — |
| 7 | @Austin High (1-5) 1184 |
> 98% (+39) | W 41-3 | 2124 | +9.7 | −15.3 | +0.06 | — |
| 8 | Austin Bowie (5-1) 1816 |
80% (+13) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | @Buda Hays Consolidated (4-3) 1432 |
95% (+29) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | Austin Del Valle (1-5) 681 |
> 98% (+59) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#26
was #25
Record
5-1
3-0 district
Elo
2153
#26 of 249
OVR Grade
86.5
#26 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
85.4
#35 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
85.1
#35 of 249 in 6A
Perf
2166
#33 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 26-6A
| 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 Dripping Springs’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2022
12-2
Rating 770 (98th)
#2 · 2025
12-2
Rating 725 (96th)
#3 · 2023
11-3
Rating 688 (93rd)
#4 · 2024
8-4
Rating 620 (82nd)
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.