← Back
CLASS 6A · District 9-6A

Garland Owls

Enrollment: 2,144 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 5
Rank
#181
was #187
Record
2-4
1-2 district
Elo
1176
#181 of 249
OVR Grade
71.7
#181 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
65.3
#217 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
65.4
#206 of 249 in 6A
Perf
872
#215 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
1
Frisco Emerson
 13% (-18) L 20-49 1020 −3.1 +16.1 — −0.63
2
@Dallas W.T. White
 64% (+5) W 33-14 1503 −4.4 −4.6 +0.04 —
3
@Marshall
 19% (-14) L 7-42 815 −17.2 +10.2 — −0.70
4
Garland Lakeview Centennial (2-4) 1348
 39% (-4) L 14-34 831 −16.3 +10.4 — −0.88
5
@Wylie East (4-2) 1720
 17% (-15) L 0-72 77 −24.9 +32.1 — −0.77
7
North Garland (1-5) 760
 81% (+14) W 32-10 989 −17.0 +3.4 +0.01 —
8
Wylie (4-2) 1571
 16% (-16) — — — — — —
9
@Garland Rowlett (3-3) 1384
 30% (-8) — — — — — —
10
South Garland (2-4) 442
 96% (+29) — — — — — —
11
@Garland Sachse (6-0) 1785
 7% (-24) — — — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 9-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 69
Mustangs
80.9
1785
 6-0 3-0 43.7 19.5 6.3-0.7 > 98% D1
2 81
Raiders
79.9
1720
 4-2 3-0 44.8 22.2 6.1-0.9 > 98% D2
3 103
Pirates
77.7
1571
 4-2 1-2 43.3 30.8 4.5-2.5 95.7% D1
4 146
Eagles
74.8
1384
 3-3 2-1 31.8 26.2 4.2-2.9 89.4% D2
5 155
Patriots
74.3
1348
 2-4 1-2 25.3 28.0 3.2-3.8 9.6% —
6 181
Owls
71.7
1176
 2-4 1-2 17.7 36.8 2.5-4.5 6.1% —
7 229
Raiders
65.4
760
 1-5 1-2 12.7 42.8 1.2-5.8 < 2% —
8 245
Titans
60.6
442
 2-4 0-3 15.0 42.0 0.1-6.9 < 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 Garland’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2006
12-3
Rating 676 (91st)
#2 · 2009
9-2
Rating 659 (89th)
#3 · 2011
9-3
Rating 658 (89th)
#4 · 2005
10-3
Rating 647 (87th)
#5 · 2004
8-3
Rating 636 (85th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 5-5 1275 23.2 18.1 +5.1 1239 −9.3 −2.7 −6.5 1337 −3.03 +0.15 −3.18 483(38th)
2024 5-5 1271 17.7 32.4 −14.7 1288 −13.7 +9.8 −23.5 913 −3.22 +0.20 −3.42 424(21st)
2023 7-4 1487 25.8 20.7 +5.1 1348 −6.0 −4.7 −1.3 1467 −2.17 +0.51 −2.68 521(53rd)
2022 5-5 1261 23.2 25.3 −2.1 1378 −7.3 +0.3 −7.5 1311 −3.51 +0.46 −3.97 473(34th)
2021 10-1 1853 51.8 18.8 +33.0 1238 +16.8 −4.5 +21.2 2031 +0.71 +1.31 −0.60 619(82nd)
2020 4-4 1271 32.0 30.0 +2.0 1364 +1.1 +4.7 −3.6 1410 −2.29 +0.32 −2.62 479(36th)
2019 3-7 920 26.5 39.6 −13.1 1323 −4.2 +16.8 −21.0 974 −5.54 +0.15 −5.70 395(14th)
2018 1-9 778 9.9 32.0 −22.1 1367 −19.4 +7.2 −26.6 834 −7.52 +0.02 −7.54 364(9th)
2017 1-9 853 11.9 35.4 −23.5 1312 −19.3 +11.6 −30.9 728 −7.14 +0.01 −7.15 356(8th)
2016 3-7 1132 20.3 35.3 −15.0 1386 −9.4 +10.8 −20.2 995 −4.94 +0.23 −5.17 417(19th)
2015 6-5 1674 35.0 29.5 +5.5 1615 +4.2 −5.8 +9.9 1748 −1.01 +1.66 −2.67 567(67th)
2014 7-3 1569 38.3 36.6 +1.7 1473 +5.6 +3.9 +1.6 1541 −0.51 +1.16 −1.67 530(55th)
2013 5-5 1658 23.2 27.2 −4.0 1566 −4.1 −3.4 −0.7 1483 −1.76 +0.52 −2.29 532(56th)
2012 6-5 1811 26.7 30.7 −4.0 1664 +2.2 −2.2 +4.4 1611 −0.61 +1.26 −1.87 562(66th)
2011 9-3 2003 34.7 13.4 +21.2 1570 +8.3 −14.9 +23.2 2080 +0.93 +2.19 −1.26 658(89th)
2010 7-4 1819 23.4 21.0 +2.4 1655 +0.7 −8.7 +9.4 1735 −0.37 +1.13 −1.50 583(73rd)
2009 9-2 2009 28.2 12.4 +15.8 1581 +5.2 −14.3 +19.5 1987 +0.97 +1.82 −0.85 659(89th)
2008 11-2 1950 25.8 17.6 +8.2 1638 +3.9 −10.8 +14.7 1868 +2.21 +2.76 −0.55 626(84th)
2007 3-7 1552 18.9 31.5 −12.6 1705 −4.5 −1.1 −3.5 1414 −2.81 +0.35 −3.16 517(51st)
2006 12-3 2136 29.5 19.3 +10.3 1788 +7.4 −14.0 +21.3 2033 +3.34 +4.71 −1.36 676(91st)
2005 10-3 2036 26.6 16.8 +9.8 1714 +7.5 −11.8 +19.4 1984 +2.25 +3.25 −1.00 647(87th)
2004 8-3 1948 28.5 15.7 +12.8 1634 +5.6 −12.3 +17.9 1947 +0.85 +2.08 −1.23 636(85th)
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.