← Back
CLASS 6A · District 28-6A

San Antonio Clark Cougars

Enrollment: 2,656 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 3
Rank
#177
was #189
Record
1-5
1-2 district
Elo
1197
#177 of 249
OVR Grade
72
#177 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
69.9
#177 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
72.3
#155 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1237
#166 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
1
San Antonio Sotomayor (5-2) 1586
 47% (-1) L 0-17 1091 −22.8 −6.5 — −0.85
2
@#29Cedar Park (7-0) 2096
 7% (-25) L 7-68 668 −11.1 +22.1 — −0.41
3
San Antonio East Central (5-1) 1731
 33% (-7) L 14-20 1641 −5.5 −11.2 — −0.83
5
@San Antonio Churchill (1-5) 1096
 71% (+9) L 28-33 918 −15.3 +8.0 — −0.97
6
San Antonio Madison (4-2) 1423
 22% (-12) L 26-28 1376 +2.7 +7.7 — −0.84
7
@San Antonio Lee (3-3) 836
 73% (+10) W 49-14 1727 +8.3 −0.8 +0.02 —
8
#18San Antonio Johnson (5-0) 2290
 < 2% (-44) — — — — — —
9
@San Antonio Roosevelt (3-3) 1374
 32% (-7) — — — — — —
10
@San Antonio Brandeis (3-3) 1461
 25% (-11) — — — — — —
11
San Antonio Reagan (3-2-1) 1744
 9% (-22) — — — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 28-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 18
Jaguars
88.5
2290
 5-0 3-0 48.8 11.2 6.9-0.1 > 98% D1
2 74
Rattlers
80.3
1744
 3-2 3-0 20.3 25.2 5.8-1.2 > 98% D1
3 147
Rough Riders
74.7
1374
 3-3 2-1 33.3 37.8 4-3 73.6% D2
4 128
Broncos
76
1461
 3-3 1-2 23.7 26.2 3.8-3.2 74.4% D2
5 141
Mavericks
75.4
1423
 4-2 1-2 22.5 18.0 3.2-3.8 43.7% —
6 192
Chargers
70.5
1096
 1-5 1-2 26.3 45.0 2.2-4.8 5.7% —
7 177
Cougars
72
1197
 1-5 1-2 20.7 30.0 1.7-5.3 2.5% —
8 220
Volunteers
66.6
836
 3-3 0-3 23.7 31.7 0.4-6.6 < 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 San Antonio Clark’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2009
13-1
Rating 664 (90th)
#2 · 2008
12-2
Rating 640 (86th)
#3 · 2005
9-3
Rating 577 (71st)
#4 · 2004
8-4
Rating 562 (66th)
#5 · 2006
5-5
Rating 547 (61st)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 6-4 1224 26.2 25.0 +1.2 1289 −6.6 +0.5 −7.1 1324 −2.37 +0.39 −2.76 475(35th)
2024 5-6 1308 23.5 27.6 −4.2 1367 −7.0 +2.6 −9.6 1259 −4.00 +0.41 −4.41 474(35th)
2023 6-5 1303 20.5 23.8 −3.3 1234 −10.6 +1.9 −12.5 1186 −3.29 +0.50 −3.79 468(32nd)
2022 6-4 1438 32.1 22.1 +10.0 1408 +2.4 −2.6 +5.0 1625 −1.98 +0.66 −2.64 531(56th)
2021 5-5 1539 32.3 21.6 +10.7 1446 +3.9 −3.2 +7.1 1678 −1.80 +0.82 −2.62 543(60th)
2020 3-6 1229 18.1 29.3 −11.2 1645 −5.8 +1.8 −7.6 1310 −2.37 +0.34 −2.71 462(31st)
2019 2-8 1031 10.8 37.3 −26.5 1525 −11.9 +13.2 −25.1 872 −4.99 +0.04 −5.03 391(13th)
2018 3-7 1236 20.1 31.4 −11.3 1528 −5.3 +4.6 −9.9 1253 −3.92 +0.20 −4.12 462(31st)
2017 3-7 1229 36.1 34.6 +1.5 1353 +3.8 +9.0 −5.2 1370 −4.29 +0.07 −4.36 476(35th)
2016 4-5 1229 24.3 29.9 −5.6 1312 −7.3 +6.0 −13.3 1167 −3.64 +0.18 −3.82 449(27th)
2015 2-8 1116 13.9 34.4 −20.5 1548 −16.1 +2.9 −19.0 1024 −5.13 +0.04 −5.17 419(19th)
2014 4-6 1242 19.9 29.4 −9.5 1516 −6.5 +1.3 −7.8 1306 −3.23 +0.50 −3.73 469(33rd)
2013 5-6 1375 23.0 32.4 −9.4 1516 −5.3 +3.8 −9.0 1274 −2.54 +0.20 −2.75 478(36th)
2012 4-6 1344 30.2 35.4 −5.2 1471 +2.2 +7.5 −5.3 1367 −3.73 +0.54 −4.26 488(40th)
2011 4-6 1327 24.6 25.7 −1.1 1431 −1.5 +2.2 −3.7 1407 −3.52 +0.46 −3.98 494(42nd)
2010 4-6 1310 29.2 25.1 +4.1 1455 +2.1 0.0 +2.1 1552 −4.65 +0.19 −4.84 513(49th)
2009 13-1 2073 30.6 11.8 +18.8 1488 +5.6 −13.1 +18.8 1969 +2.48 +2.66 −0.18 664(90th)
2008 12-2 1954 35.8 17.7 +18.1 1487 +8.2 −7.7 +15.9 1898 +2.13 +2.67 −0.54 640(86th)
2007 6-5 1574 26.2 18.4 +7.8 1386 +0.4 −2.7 +3.1 1577 −2.78 +0.44 −3.22 543(60th)
2006 5-5 1532 25.7 17.6 +8.1 1399 −1.2 −6.1 +4.9 1623 −3.09 +0.68 −3.77 547(61st)
2005 9-3 1704 27.2 18.4 +8.8 1426 +2.4 −4.6 +7.0 1676 −0.81 +1.07 −1.88 577(71st)
2004 8-4 1596 33.2 24.8 +8.4 1437 +7.8 +1.4 +6.3 1658 −1.95 +0.76 −2.71 562(66th)
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.