| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | @Austin Bowie (5-1) 1816 |
32% (-7) | L 14-62 | 753 | −8.0 | +21.9 | — | −0.65 |
| 2 | Lake Belton (3-3) 1596 |
25% (-11) | L 24-30 | 1393 | −8.2 | −3.9 | — | −0.65 |
| 3 | @Leander Rouse (4-3) 1600 |
46% (-2) | L 3-55 | 436 | −19.5 | +23.1 | — | −0.84 |
| 4 | @Cedar Park Vista Ridge (2-5) 1360 |
35% (-6) | L 28-56 | 485 | −16.2 | +24.4 | — | −0.85 |
| 5 | #33Lake Travis (2-2-1) 2062 |
2% (-36) | L 6-59 | 788 | −13.9 | +14.6 | — | −0.26 |
| 6 | @Round Rock Cedar Ridge (7-0) 1852 |
8% (-24) | L 29-77 | 820 | +7.2 | +34.4 | — | −0.56 |
| 7 | Round Rock Stony Point (3-4) 1335 |
44% (-2) | L 39-57 | 900 | +4.2 | +28.2 | — | −0.93 |
| 8 | < 2% (-49) | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
| 9 | #42Round Rock (4-2) 2019 |
2% (-37) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | @Round Rock Westwood (1-6) 1059 |
54% (+2) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#191
was #181
Record
0-7
0-3 district
Elo
1099
#191 of 249
OVR Grade
70.5
#191 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
69.5
#180 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
57.7
#232 of 249 in 6A
Perf
796
#222 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 25-6A
| 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 Round Rock McNeil’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2004
7-6
Rating 573 (70th)
#2 · 2025
6-4
Rating 566 (67th)
#3 · 2008
5-4
Rating 550 (62nd)
#4 · 2023
7-5
Rating 548 (61st)
#5 · 2007
4-6
Rating 546 (61st)
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.





