← Back
CLASS 6A · District 22-6A

Katy Mayde Creek Rams

Enrollment: 2,844 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 9
Rank
#190
was #188
Record
1-5
0-4 district
Elo
1114
#190 of 249
OVR Grade
70.8
#190 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
73.1
#144 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
66.2
#199 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1176
#176 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
1
Fort Bend Elkins (2-5) 1464
 57% (+3) W 38-35 1509 +9.9 +9.5 +0.09 —
2
Cy Woods (4-1) 1704
 44% (-2) L 18-41 1052 −6.2 +11.7 — −0.84
3
Katy Taylor (5-2) 1540
 62% (+5) L 13-35 891 −12.6 +11.8 — −0.94
5
@Katy Tompkins (3-3) 1870
 11% (-20) L 20-44 1230 −2.7 +8.1 — −0.69
6
Katy Jordan (4-2) 1745
 4% (-31) L 8-44 983 −13.8 +6.9 — −0.42
7
@Katy Cinco Ranch (3-3) 1510
 19% (-14) L 34-41 1393 +9.6 +13.8 — −0.82
8
Katy Seven Lakes (0-6) 1008
 61% (+4) — — — — — —
9
@Katy Morton Ranch (2-4) 1216
 39% (-4) — — — — — —
10
Katy Paetow (2-4) 1511
 16% (-16) — — — — — —
11
@#5Katy (7-0) 2587
 < 2% (-59) — — — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 22-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 5
Tigers
93
2587
 7-0 5-0 46.4 11.6 8-0 > 98% D1
2 57
Falcons
82.2
1870
 3-3 3-1 29.0 30.3 6.6-1.4 > 98% D2
3 73
Warriors
80.3
1745
 4-2 3-2 33.7 26.0 5.6-2.4 97.7% D1
4 112
Mustangs
77.2
1540
 5-2 3-2 25.6 21.4 4.3-3.7 66.1% D2
5 123
Cougars
76.8
1510
 3-3 3-2 23.5 27.0 4.3-3.7 28.8% —
6 121
Panthers
76.8
1511
 2-4 2-2 21.8 27.7 3.5-4.5 8% —
7 173
Mavericks
72.3
1216
 2-4 1-3 19.0 37.2 2-6 < 2% —
8 190
Rams
70.8
1114
 1-5 0-4 21.8 40.0 1.2-6.8 < 2% —
9 205
Spartans
69.2
1008
 0-6 0-4 15.0 42.5 0.6-7.4 < 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 Katy Mayde Creek’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2019
9-3
Rating 551 (62nd)
#2 · 2004
5-5
Rating 532 (56th)
#3 · 2008
5-5
Rating 524 (53rd)
#4 · 2020
4-5
Rating 514 (50th)
#5 · 2025
4-6
Rating 506 (47th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 4-6 1325 31.1 30.3 +0.8 1511 +0.3 +0.7 −0.4 1489 −3.42 +0.51 −3.92 506(47th)
2024 5-5 1359 19.2 23.7 −4.5 1491 −7.9 −3.2 −4.7 1384 −2.51 +0.42 −2.93 496(42nd)
2023 3-7 955 14.4 33.2 −18.8 1369 −15.2 +9.1 −24.3 894 −4.79 +0.24 −5.03 398(14th)
2022 2-8 950 17.5 39.3 −21.8 1592 −11.0 +7.2 −18.2 1044 −4.64 +0.20 −4.84 409(17th)
2021 2-8 1135 14.3 41.8 −27.5 1685 −11.1 +11.2 −22.3 942 −4.71 +0.07 −4.79 409(17th)
2020 4-5 1477 27.3 31.3 −4.0 1629 +3.6 +2.2 +1.4 1536 −1.91 +0.46 −2.37 514(50th)
2019 9-3 1689 26.8 23.1 +3.7 1521 +0.8 −4.4 +5.2 1629 +0.36 +1.31 −0.95 551(62nd)
2018 3-7 1138 34.1 37.4 −3.3 1474 +4.4 +8.6 −4.1 1396 −4.54 +0.09 −4.63 472(34th)
2017 3-6 1004 28.3 41.7 −13.3 1527 +3.8 +15.4 −11.6 1210 −3.34 +0.12 −3.47 435(23rd)
2016 1-9 614 15.7 33.4 −17.7 1510 −12.2 +5.9 −18.1 1046 −6.84 +0.02 −6.86 378(11th)
2015 0-10 648 16.6 36.4 −19.8 1511 −11.7 +8.3 −20.0 1001 −7.53 0.00 −7.53 374(10th)
2014 2-8 894 13.5 32.8 −19.3 1441 −14.5 +6.6 −21.1 971 −5.34 +0.06 −5.40 394(13th)
2013 1-9 725 7.5 32.0 −24.5 1519 −16.9 +5.0 −21.9 954 −6.12 +0.02 −6.14 377(11th)
2012 3-7 1002 30.5 37.7 −7.2 1479 −0.1 +8.6 −8.7 1282 −4.19 +0.10 −4.29 446(26th)
2011 1-8 925 14.8 36.4 −21.7 1519 −10.3 +10.6 −20.9 977 −5.37 +0.06 −5.44 401(15th)
2010 2-8 1065 15.8 34.7 −18.9 1549 −11.7 +5.1 −16.8 1080 −5.14 +0.16 −5.30 428(21st)
2009 1-9 1040 16.2 33.0 −16.8 1574 −8.4 +5.5 −13.9 1153 −6.19 +0.10 −6.29 434(23rd)
2008 5-5 1485 21.9 28.1 −6.2 1673 −1.4 −2.2 +0.8 1519 −2.04 +0.57 −2.61 524(53rd)
2007 6-5 1439 20.5 29.5 −8.9 1492 −4.6 +3.2 −7.8 1306 −1.84 +0.90 −2.74 493(42nd)
2006 1-9 958 12.5 30.1 −17.6 1547 −11.2 +4.9 −16.1 1096 −6.50 +0.03 −6.53 422(20th)
2005 1-8 1040 19.7 34.7 −15.0 1571 −3.0 +10.5 −13.5 1162 −6.03 +0.17 −6.20 439(24th)
2004 5-5 1436 17.5 15.4 +2.1 1449 −5.1 −5.3 +0.2 1505 −2.65 +0.68 −3.34 532(56th)
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.