| Wk | Opponent (Rec) Elo | Proj WP% | Result | Perf | AOS | ADS | WQ | LQ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | @Ennis |
> 98% (+41) | W 72-14 | 3047 | +45.9 | −15.9 | +0.26 | — |
| 2 | #21Coppell (5-1) 2214 |
86% (+17) | W 27-24 | 2448 | +16.7 | −21.3 | +0.81 | — |
| 3 | 68% (+7) | W 44-30 | 2629 | +32.4 | −12.8 | +0.93 | — | |
| 4 | Mansfield Lake Ridge (4-2) 1880 |
97% (+33) | W 63-27 | 2654 | +30.9 | −15.2 | +0.51 | — |
| 5 | @Dallas Skyline (1-5) 1070 |
> 98% (+65) | W 61-14 | 2218 | +21.9 | −6.9 | +0.04 | — |
| 7 | #1North Crowley (6-0) 2885 |
40% (-4) | L 17-42 | 2184 | +16.1 | −11.2 | — | −0.02 |
| 8 | @Red Oak (4-2) 1711 |
98% (+36) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 9 | #7Duncanville (3-3) 2485 |
63% (+5) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 10 | @Crowley (2-4) 1433 |
> 98% (+47) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 11 | Mansfield (2-4) 1536 |
> 98% (+43) | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Tradition Never Graduates 2026 | @TexasTNG | texastng.com | ||||||||
Rank
#4
was #4
Record
5-1
2-1 district
Elo
2612
#4 of 249
OVR Grade
93.4
#4 of 249 in 6A
OFF Grade
94.2
#4 of 249 in 6A
DEF Grade
86.8
#29 of 249 in 6A
Perf
2530
#7 of 249 in 6A
Schedule & Results
District Standings Projection - District 11-6A
| 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 Waxahachie’s season stacked up against the state’s best year over year.
Best TNG Rated Seasons
#1 · 2025
11-2
Rating 772 (98th)
#2 · 2024
9-4
Rating 696 (94th)
#3 · 2022
10-3
Rating 682 (92nd)
#4 · 2023
9-3
Rating 624 (83rd)
#5 · 2021
6-5
Rating 573 (70th)
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.