← Back
CLASS 6A · District 5-6A

Flower Mound Jaguars

Enrollment: 3,393 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 3
Rank
#81
was #96
Record
5-1
2-1 district
Elo
1720
#81 of 249
OVR Grade
79.9
#81 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
76.6
#106 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
85.4
#34 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1862
#67 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
1
@McKinney Boyd (2-4) 1298
 63% (+5) W 28-24 1479 +1.5 +2.4 +0.09 —
2
@Keller Timber Creek (3-3) 1510
 42% (-3) W 31-0 2139 −1.8 −27.4 +0.22 —
3
Fort Worth Boswell (3-3) 1350
 59% (+4) W 42-24 1978 +10.0 −9.2 +0.21 —
5
Denton Braswell (5-1) 1736
 61% (+4) L 23-37 1283 −2.9 +5.7 — −0.75
6
@Little Elm (3-3) 1426
 59% (+4) W 14-12 1697 −10.3 −18.1 +0.18 —
7
Flower Mound Marcus (2-4) 1424
 57% (+3) W 49-0 2592 +16.9 −26.7 +0.21 —
8
@Frisco Wakeland (2-4) 1457
 75% (+11) — — — — — —
9
#9Lewisville (3-3) 2457
 4% (-29) — — — — — —
10
@Lewisville Hebron (4-2) 1854
 36% (-5) — — — — — —
11
#19Denton Guyer (4-2) 2248
 10% (-21) — — — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 5-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 9
Fighting Farmers
91
2457
 3-3 3-0 45.7 14.2 6.8-0.2 > 98% D1
2 19
Wildcats
87.9
2248
 4-2 2-1 32.5 21.5 5.7-1.3 > 98% D2
3 60
Hawks
81.9
1854
 4-2 3-0 25.3 26.2 4.5-2.5 87.7% D1
4 75
Bengals
80.2
1736
 5-1 2-1 30.8 26.7 4-3 84.9% D2
5 81
Jaguars
79.9
1720
 5-1 2-1 31.2 16.2 3.2-3.8 24% —
6 131
Wolverines
76
1457
 2-4 0-3 16.3 35.0 1.6-5.4 3.1% —
7 140
Marauders
75.5
1424
 2-4 0-3 23.0 36.5 1.2-5.8 < 2% —
8 139
Lobos
75.5
1426
 3-3 0-3 29.8 24.2 1-6 < 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 Flower Mound’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2010
7-4
Rating 640 (86th)
#2 · 2011
3-7
Rating 604 (78th)
#3 · 2021
5-6
Rating 602 (78th)
#4 · 2019
8-4
Rating 600 (77th)
#5 · 2008
6-4
Rating 598 (77th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 2-8 1327 18.4 33.2 −14.8 1690 −5.3 +1.7 −7.0 1325 −4.11 +0.08 −4.19 484(38th)
2024 5-5 1525 30.1 30.2 −0.1 1768 +4.9 −4.8 +9.7 1743 −1.21 +0.66 −1.87 562(66th)
2023 5-5 1553 28.3 29.9 −1.6 1605 +1.3 +0.4 +0.8 1521 −1.59 +0.86 −2.44 535(57th)
2022 3-7 1528 27.3 34.8 −7.5 1686 +3.4 +2.2 +1.2 1529 −3.46 +0.46 −3.92 526(54th)
2021 5-6 1709 31.0 30.7 +0.3 1882 +10.0 −5.4 +15.4 1886 −0.88 +1.46 −2.34 602(78th)
2020 4-6 1558 27.1 27.9 −0.8 1704 +2.1 −6.4 +8.4 1710 −2.47 +0.65 −3.12 545(60th)
2019 8-4 1835 40.7 27.9 +12.7 1579 +14.7 −0.9 +15.5 1888 +0.51 +1.92 −1.42 600(77th)
2018 8-3 1785 38.5 26.3 +12.2 1529 +12.4 −0.6 +13.0 1825 +0.34 +2.02 −1.68 587(74th)
2017 4-6 1671 24.5 22.7 +1.8 1650 +0.4 −7.6 +8.0 1699 −2.04 +0.80 −2.84 560(65th)
2016 4-6 1541 31.9 30.4 +1.5 1717 +5.4 −3.7 +9.1 1728 −2.29 +0.49 −2.77 552(63rd)
2015 1-9 1163 19.0 34.0 −15.0 1896 −1.6 −2.1 +0.5 1512 −4.42 +0.68 −5.10 506(46th)
2014 1-9 1235 19.9 38.0 −18.1 1882 −1.6 +1.3 −2.9 1428 −4.47 +0.16 −4.63 501(44th)
2013 2-8 1405 17.4 40.7 −23.3 1825 −1.8 +6.8 −8.6 1285 −3.17 +0.47 −3.65 492(41st)
2012 3-7 1461 18.5 28.5 −10.0 1821 −2.5 −4.4 +1.9 1548 −2.28 +0.87 −3.15 533(56th)
2011 3-7 1686 37.9 42.7 −4.8 1946 +17.8 +5.0 +12.7 1818 −1.34 +1.33 −2.67 604(78th)
2010 7-4 1840 48.8 46.6 +2.2 1946 +28.3 +9.0 +19.3 1983 +1.51 +3.24 −1.73 640(86th)
2009 6-5 1710 34.5 42.7 −8.2 1802 +11.4 +7.0 +4.4 1611 +0.08 +1.27 −1.19 564(67th)
2008 6-4 1717 30.2 20.2 +10.0 1681 +6.6 −9.9 +16.5 1911 −0.19 +1.35 −1.55 598(77th)
2007 6-5 1638 23.6 17.9 +5.7 1595 −0.9 −9.4 +8.6 1714 −1.53 +1.02 −2.55 568(68th)
2006 8-3 1842 27.6 16.8 +10.8 1514 +2.7 −8.0 +10.8 1769 +0.41 +2.24 −1.83 596(76th)
2005 6-4 1582 30.1 24.4 +5.7 1609 +7.0 −3.1 +10.1 1752 −0.95 +0.99 −1.94 567(68th)
2004 5-5 1456 23.1 27.6 −4.5 1604 −0.4 +0.7 −1.0 1474 −2.04 +0.92 −2.96 520(52nd)
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.