Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

C-USA - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Rice 1,600.7177 1,565.2553 1,582.8872 48.98 63.17 0.123
2nd Fla. Atlantic 1,550.4532 1,526.6486 1,538.5049 44.38 63.25 0.069
3rd Western Ky. 1,549.2502 1,513.9323 1,531.4894 44.49 62.75 0.063
4th North Texas 1,538.8686 1,518.3525 1,528.5762 44.88 61.02 0.046
5th UTSA 1,526.2147 1,496.1343 1,511.0997 44.59 60.63 0.034
6th Southern Miss. 1,519.2948 1,488.3217 1,503.7285 43.01 60.52 0.042
7th Charlotte 1,509.5530 1,476.1885 1,492.7775 42.47 58.97 0.027
8th FIU 1,503.0375 1,475.2003 1,489.0538 42.14 59.13 -0.008
9th UAB 1,485.4282 1,454.0488 1,469.6547 40.67 58.66 -0.021
10th Marshall 1,446.3789 1,416.8675 1,431.5471 39.65 56.51 -0.046
11th UTEP 1,439.4670 1,414.0046 1,426.6790 40.30 54.87 -0.059
12th Louisiana Tech 1,392.1816 1,373.8112 1,382.9659 37.99 52.32 -0.088
13th Middle Tenn. 1,378.9734 1,352.7644 1,365.8060 35.96 52.05 -0.107

ViPR Adjusted Offenses and Defenses are adjusted to expected values against an average team in the same division.

ViPR Division Adjusted Offenses

Rnk. Team Hit% Kill% HE% AST% O_DIG% O_BLK% ACE%
1st Fla. Atlantic 0.2796 43.14 15.18 40.98 42.38 5.92 7.27
2nd Rice 0.2679 39.59 12.79 37.07 48.49 4.92 5.61
3rd Western Ky. 0.2480 40.63 15.83 38.26 42.83 7.33 7.06
4th North Texas 0.2478 38.80 14.02 35.69 46.73 5.16 5.71
5th Southern Miss. 0.2361 39.93 16.32 36.54 45.16 5.03 5.26
6th UTSA 0.2269 37.67 14.98 35.52 46.96 6.18 6.80
7th Charlotte 0.2152 34.30 12.78 32.14 52.56 5.40 4.74
8th UAB 0.1989 36.43 16.54 34.18 48.22 6.68 6.33
9th FIU 0.1964 35.98 16.34 33.80 49.08 7.04 6.06
10th Marshall 0.1853 34.08 15.55 31.41 52.21 5.75 5.51
11th UTEP 0.1695 33.15 16.19 30.78 50.73 6.70 4.92
12th Middle Tenn. 0.1598 33.61 17.63 31.49 49.34 7.93 5.61
13th Louisiana Tech 0.1484 30.69 15.85 28.41 55.81 5.99 5.72

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Rice 0.1451 29.97 15.46 28.08 56.88 5.97 4.45
2nd Western Ky. 0.1851 35.09 16.59 32.61 50.84 6.30 5.83
3rd Charlotte 0.1884 35.04 16.20 32.76 50.33 6.74 5.17
4th UTSA 0.1933 33.48 14.14 31.78 54.83 5.03 4.80
5th Southern Miss. 0.1944 35.27 15.83 32.89 50.09 7.14 5.74
6th North Texas 0.2021 35.57 15.36 33.29 47.72 6.10 5.42
7th FIU 0.2040 35.44 15.04 33.48 49.95 6.11 4.92
8th Fla. Atlantic 0.2105 35.48 14.43 33.30 51.84 5.68 5.57
9th UAB 0.2198 37.04 15.06 34.93 48.31 5.45 6.51
10th UTEP 0.2281 37.65 14.84 34.99 47.37 5.12 4.98
11th Marshall 0.2317 37.10 13.93 35.37 50.48 4.21 5.16
12th Louisiana Tech 0.2365 38.06 14.41 34.65 48.20 4.66 6.73
13th Middle Tenn. 0.2663 39.35 12.71 36.04 46.69 3.63 6.67

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,481.1361 1,482.3706 1,487.1784 1,489.4911 1,485.0441
Difference 1.2345 6.0423 8.3549 5.2106

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Rice 118 2,746 1,301 144 204 47.38 19.1 13.5 2,385 915 110 148 61.64 21.7 16.1
Fla. Atlantic 101 2,354 1,059 168 228 44.99 14.0 10.3 2,065 766 111 144 62.91 18.6 14.3
Western Ky. 117 2,633 1,128 175 279 42.84 15.0 9.4 2,494 972 151 278 61.03 16.5 9.0
UTSA 105 2,370 1,050 157 241 44.30 15.1 9.8 2,226 901 108 189 59.52 20.6 11.8
Charlotte 119 2,574 1,129 129 211 43.86 20.0 12.2 2,451 999 127 192 59.24 19.3 12.8
Southern Miss. 127 2,820 1,223 157 212 43.37 18.0 13.3 2,689 1,085 158 202 59.65 17.0 13.3
North Texas 131 2,899 1,246 154 212 42.98 18.8 13.7 2,796 1,151 159 284 58.83 17.6 9.8
FIU 117 2,553 1,100 153 240 43.09 16.7 10.6 2,482 1,027 121 226 58.62 20.5 11.0
UAB 100 2,237 923 141 200 41.26 15.9 11.2 2,245 939 147 222 58.17 15.3 10.1
Marshall 108 2,277 896 121 216 39.35 18.8 10.5 2,475 1,099 128 224 55.60 19.3 11.0
Louisiana Tech 106 2,184 880 132 175 40.29 16.5 12.5 2,399 1,121 156 159 53.27 15.4 15.1
UTEP 99 2,030 793 91 131 39.06 22.3 15.5 2,283 1,064 117 187 53.40 19.5 12.2
Middle Tenn. 101 2,068 798 123 283 38.59 16.8 7.3 2,358 1,101 155 222 53.31 15.2 10.6
Conference Average 111 2,442 1,040 142 218 42.41 17.5 11.5 2,411 1,011 134 206 58.09 18.2 12.1
  • Sets - Team Sets Played
  • S - Serves
  • SP - Service Points
  • SA - Service Aces
  • SE - Service Errors
  • SP% - Service Point Percentage
  • S/SA - Serves Per Service Ace
  • S/SE - Serves Per Service Error
  • OS - Opponent Serves
  • SPA - Service Points Allowed
  • SAA - Service Aces Allowed
  • SEA - Service Errors Against
  • SO% - Team Sideout Percentage
  • OS/SAA - Serves Per Ace Allowed
  • OS/SEA - Serves Per Error Against

The Best Games in the C-USA

Game Link EPIC Game Date Location Teams Sets Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Set 5
GAME

76.08

2018-09-30 Charlotte, N.C.
Charlotte
Fla. Atlantic
2
3
25
19
25
23
26
28
14
25
13
15
GAME

75.15

2018-10-19 Boca Raton, Fla.
Fla. Atlantic
Southern Miss.
3
1
25
22
27
25
21
25
27
25
GAME

75.04

2018-10-12 Houston, Texas
Rice
Marshall
3
2
25
27
22
25
27
25
25
14
15
10
GAME

74.84

2018-10-05 Denton, Texas
North Texas
Fla. Atlantic
1
3
21
25
25
21
23
25
27
29
GAME

74.58

2018-11-08 Boca Raton, Fla.
Fla. Atlantic
Rice
3
2
25
21
26
24
15
25
13
25
15
12
GAME

74.23

2018-10-07 Hattiesburg, Miss.
Southern Miss.
Rice
2
3
25
22
22
25
17
25
25
22
12
15
GAME

74.01

2018-10-28 El Paso, Texas
UTEP
Rice
2
3
25
23
25
19
17
25
25
27
10
15
GAME

73.22

2018-10-21 Boca Raton, Fla.
Fla. Atlantic
Charlotte
3
2
25
20
25
23
13
25
25
27
15
8
GAME

72.96

2018-10-21 Miami, Florida
FIU
Southern Miss.
3
2
21
25
27
29
25
21
25
23
15
13
GAME

72.88

2018-10-14 Houston, Texas
Rice
North Texas
3
0
25
17
25
21
26
24

HuskerGeek C-USA All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
S
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
A
D
S

Player of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Attacker of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Setter of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Defensive Player of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

WPA

Rk. Name Team WPA
1 28.6148
2 27.4724
3 27.3850
4 26.3791
5 25.9983
6 25.3772
7 24.2168
8 22.0205
9 20.9488
10 20.7234

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 16.8894
2 16.8834
3 15.9311
4 15.8911
5 15.7192
6 15.3562
7 14.4477
8 14.0598
9 13.6120
10 13.5664

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 19.6049
2 17.7951
3 17.6941
4 17.6428
5 13.6348
6 12.7671
7 12.7319
8 12.4837
9 12.4413
10 12.0371

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2398
2 0.2236
3 0.2222
4 0.2198
5 0.2184
6 0.2090
7 0.2038
8 0.2034
9 0.2014
10 0.1936

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1520
2 0.1443
3 0.1406
4 0.1344
5 0.1298
6 0.1289
7 0.1271
8 0.1216
9 0.1215
10 0.1160

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1690
2 0.1634
3 0.1512
4 0.1508
5 0.1299
6 0.1232
7 0.1216
8 0.1185
9 0.1104
10 0.1082


Explanations

Conference Strength – The Conference Strength table has two parts.  The first row is a list of averages of the scores for a selection of teams in the conference ranging from all of them under the heading “Average” to an average of teams in the conference if we remove the top and bottom three teams.  This is designed to check if a conference is propped up by its elite teams of held down by its weakest teams.  The Composite score on the far right is an average of those scores.  It is a weighted score where the middle teams have a higher value than the edge teams.  The second row containing difference is simply a measure of how different removing the edge teams makes the conference from its initial average.  If the numbers are positive, then removing the edge teams increases the conferences rating.  If a value grows from the value before it, then the team removed at the bottom of the ratings was rated farther outside of the mean than the team removed at the top of the ratings.  It was weighing the average down so to speak.  The Composite difference at the far right is simply an average of the differences.

The Best Conference Games – A short list of the best games played between two members of the conference which is calculated using the EPIC score of each game.  EPIC score is essentially very simple amounting to adding the teams combined ViPR Rating and the total Win Probability Added scored by each team.

All-Conference Teams – All-conference teams are calculated using Win Probability Added per Set Played and the quality of the team that the player plays on. Team quality is included because better teams tend to have better players and more of them.  This often means that players on better teams have fewer opportunities than standouts on lesser teams.

Awards Lists – Each awards list uses the same formula that is used to calculate All-Conference Teams, and decides based on the focus of the list.  Player of the Year has no limitation on how the player score is added up. While Attacker of the Year must have a higher attack score than any other metric.  Similarly Setter and Defensive Player must acquire most of their score through those metrics.

HuskerGeek
HuskerGeek