← Back
CLASS 6A · District 21-6A

Strake Jesuit Crusaders

Enrollment: 2,974 · Dist. Enr. Rk · 2
Rank
#124
was #125
Record
2-5
2-2 district
Elo
1493
#124 of 249
OVR Grade
76.5
#124 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
73.6
#138 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
78.8
#87 of 249 in 6A
Perf
1562
#111 of 249 in 6A

Schedule & Results

Wk Opponent (Rec) Elo Proj WP% Result Perf AOS ADS WQ LQ
1
#46Cy Falls (5-1) 1967
 19% (-14) L 3-36 1096 −15.0 +1.2 — −0.38
2
@#13Humble Summer Creek (4-3) 2373
 3% (-33) L 6-36 1680 −2.6 −9.9 — −0.09
3
@Spring Dekaney (3-3) 1327
 69% (+8) L 14-21 1202 −9.6 +2.3 — −0.88
4
@#10Fort Bend Ridge Point (7-0) 2445
 < 2% (-39) L 6-38 1587 −3.7 −7.2 — −0.08
5
Fort Bend Hightower (5-2) 1828
 22% (-12) L 28-40 1691 +12.3 +4.7 — −0.59
6
Fort Bend Clements (3-4) 1095
 76% (+11) W 45-14 1974 +9.2 −9.8 +0.05 —
7
@Fort Bend Austin (1-6) 869
 92% (+24) W 27-7 1700 −4.4 −12.4 +0.02 —
9
Fort Bend Elkins (2-5) 1464
 53% (+1) — — — — — —
10
@Fort Bend Bush (1-6) 1215
 76% (+11) — — — — — —
11
Fort Bend Travis (6-1) 1770
 24% (-11) — — — — — —
Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com

District Standings Projection - District 21-6A

Rk Team (Enroll Rk) OVR/Elo Overall District PPG PAPG ProjRec PO% Bracket
1 10
Panthers
90.9
2445
 7-0 4-0 41.9 12.9 6.9-0.1 > 98% D2
2 63
Hurricanes
81.6
1828
 5-2 4-0 36.3 13.4 5.6-1.4 > 98% D2
3 71
Tigers
80.7
1770
 6-1 4-0 32.7 21.0 5.3-1.7 > 98% D1
4 124
Crusaders
76.5
1493
 2-5 2-2 18.4 27.4 3.5-3.5 59.2% D1
5 127
Knights
76.1
1464
 2-5 1-3 22.0 31.0 3.2-3.8 38.9% —
6 174
Broncos
72.3
1215
 1-6 1-3 12.4 35.4 1.9-5.1 < 2% —
7 193
Rangers
70.5
1095
 3-4 0-4 26.7 33.9 1.3-5.7 < 2% —
8 217
Bulldogs
67.1
869
 1-6 0-4 19.3 30.3 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 Strake Jesuit’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.

Best TNG Rated Seasons

#1 · 2018
10-2
Rating 653 (88th)
#2 · 2019
10-3
Rating 626 (84th)
#3 · 2025
10-3
Rating 601 (78th)
#4 · 2017
8-3
Rating 600 (77th)
#5 · 2008
9-2
Rating 590 (75th)

Team Performance History

Year Record Final
Elo		 PPG PAPG Margin Elo
SOS		 AOS ADS DOM Perf RQ WQ LQ All-Time
Rating (%ile)
2025 10-3 1884 37.5 26.8 +10.8 1435 +8.1 −1.3 +9.5 1736 +0.52 +1.57 −1.05 601(78th)
2024 9-4 1737 34.5 26.2 +8.4 1419 +5.3 −0.5 +5.7 1643 −0.71 +1.07 −1.79 575(70th)
2023 3-8 1231 20.1 33.7 −13.6 1441 −6.2 +7.7 −13.8 1154 −5.28 +0.14 −5.42 456(30th)
2022 4-6 1414 35.8 36.8 −1.0 1469 +8.2 +10.6 −2.5 1439 −3.32 +0.72 −4.04 504(46th)
2021 4-6 1633 32.4 25.5 +6.9 1661 +7.9 −4.2 +12.1 1803 −2.07 +0.30 −2.37 569(68th)
2020 4-6 1645 24.1 23.5 +0.6 1718 +2.1 −7.8 +9.9 1747 −2.20 +0.35 −2.55 557(64th)
2019 10-3 2040 34.3 21.5 +12.8 1562 +7.4 −7.4 +14.9 1871 +1.25 +2.36 −1.10 626(84th)
2018 10-2 1950 45.1 22.5 +22.6 1595 +18.3 −6.8 +25.1 2126 +1.59 +2.20 −0.61 653(88th)
2017 8-3 1808 25.7 16.8 +8.9 1564 +1.3 −10.5 +11.8 1796 +0.53 +0.96 −0.43 600(77th)
2016 5-5 1502 20.3 20.5 −0.2 1475 −7.9 −6.8 −1.1 1473 −2.41 +0.35 −2.77 515(50th)
2015 8-5 1667 32.6 36.5 −3.8 1566 +6.5 +6.3 +0.2 1506 −0.63 +1.38 −2.01 544(60th)
2014 3-7 1128 24.4 36.7 −12.3 1510 −2.9 +9.6 −12.5 1188 −3.80 +0.07 −3.87 443(26th)
2013 1-9 1025 22.2 40.2 −18.0 1640 −0.1 +11.5 −11.7 1208 −5.30 +0.01 −5.32 438(24th)
2012 2-7 1269 14.6 38.2 −23.7 1747 −9.7 +2.1 −11.9 1203 −2.97 +0.09 −3.06 463(31st)
2011 3-7 1304 20.5 32.2 −11.7 1643 −2.3 +3.7 −6.0 1350 −3.24 +0.16 −3.40 484(38th)
2010 3-7 1275 25.0 30.9 −5.9 1610 −2.5 −0.4 −2.1 1447 −3.38 +0.09 −3.47 496(43rd)
2009 5-5 1403 27.1 26.5 +0.6 1291 −3.6 +4.4 −8.0 1299 −3.35 +0.49 −3.84 486(39th)
2008 9-2 1759 27.8 14.4 +13.5 1344 +1.1 −5.7 +6.7 1669 −0.15 +1.18 −1.33 590(75th)
2007 8-3 1762 30.1 25.7 +4.4 1595 +5.3 −3.3 +8.6 1714 +0.81 +1.71 −0.90 577(71st)
2006 4-6 1528 23.2 30.4 −7.2 1595 0.0 +1.3 −1.3 1467 −3.57 +0.55 −4.12 522(53rd)
2005 9-2 1651 28.3 14.5 +13.7 1403 +0.9 −7.4 +8.3 1706 +0.07 +1.42 −1.35 580(72nd)
2004 4-6 1418 18.1 18.7 −0.6 1504 −4.8 −5.0 +0.2 1504 −3.52 +0.77 −4.30 521(52nd)
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.