| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 47% (-1) | L 17-28 | 2297 | +9.6 | −22.2 | — | −0.08 | |
| 2 | #20Cibolo Steele (4-1-1) 2221 |
53% (+1) | W 38-23 | 2622 | +19.3 | −25.5 | +0.86 | — |
| 3 | 66% (+6) | W 21-7 | 2717 | +9.9 | −38.7 | +0.84 | — | |
| 4 | Humble (1-6) 1472 |
> 98% (+40) | W 43-7 | 2408 | +14.0 | −22.4 | +0.18 | — |
| 5 | 23% (-11) | L 0-35 | 1856 | −0.3 | −14.6 | — | −0.02 | |
| 6 | #6Sheldon CE King (6-1) 2580 |
44% (-2) | L 14-42 | 2089 | +7.0 | −16.5 | — | −0.07 |
| 7 | @Channelview (0-7) 780 |
> 98% (+62) | W 70-0 | 2286 | +17.4 | −14.1 | +0.01 | — |
| 9 | Humble Kingwood (3-4) 1639 |
95% (+27) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | @Crosby (4-3) 1793 |
90% (+21) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | #13Humble Summer Creek (4-3) 2373 |
44% (-2) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#16
was #16
Record
4-3
2-2 district
Elo
2319
#16 of 249
OVR Grade
89
#16 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
82.7
#54 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
93.7
#6 of 249 in 6A
Perf
2325
#24 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 17-6A
| 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 Humble Atascocita’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2022
11-3
Rating 806 (99th)
#2 · 2024
12-2
Rating 788 (98th)
#3 · 2023
11-3
Rating 785 (98th)
#4 · 2021
11-3
Rating 764 (98th)
#5 · 2019
12-2
Rating 755 (98th)
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.