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 Western Ky. 1,601.5784 1,605.0361 1,603.3063 55.92 62.73 0.230
2nd Rice 1,573.8849 1,577.8310 1,575.8567 49.94 63.55 0.174
3rd UTEP 1,494.5879 1,501.7801 1,498.1797 51.37 55.78 0.112
4th Charlotte 1,436.6621 1,438.2916 1,437.4766 48.84 52.53 0.033
5th North Texas 1,424.8050 1,435.3511 1,430.0683 50.59 50.35 0.035
6th Marshall 1,416.3651 1,420.0310 1,418.1968 48.73 49.95 0.008
7th UTSA 1,403.2635 1,412.1429 1,407.6962 52.34 49.34 -0.007
8th Southern Miss. 1,400.6066 1,408.7343 1,404.6645 48.73 51.43 -0.023
9th UAB 1,399.5495 1,407.2376 1,403.3883 49.14 51.94 0.016
10th FIU 1,395.6320 1,393.2466 1,394.4388 48.75 46.56 -0.007
11th Middle Tenn. 1,392.4410 1,396.0729 1,394.2558 48.40 50.78 -0.040
12th Old Dominion 1,363.4468 1,364.3239 1,363.8853 45.29 50.74 -0.046
13th Fla. Atlantic 1,355.1721 1,358.5814 1,356.8757 47.50 45.57 -0.059
14th Louisiana Tech 1,316.9445 1,322.2063 1,319.5728 48.70 44.95 -0.096

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 Western Ky. 0.3541 46.68 11.27 43.01 39.70 5.25 7.33
2nd Rice 0.3220 42.87 10.68 39.22 44.33 3.82 5.52
3rd UTEP 0.2908 42.79 13.71 38.72 42.99 5.06 7.72
4th North Texas 0.2480 38.56 13.76 34.81 46.88 4.96 6.37
5th Charlotte 0.2440 36.76 12.35 33.66 51.22 5.37 6.09
6th UAB 0.2205 37.24 15.20 34.16 46.93 6.79 7.15
7th Marshall 0.2135 35.10 13.74 32.67 52.74 4.85 5.49
8th Southern Miss. 0.1958 35.19 15.61 32.12 48.74 6.46 6.23
9th Middle Tenn. 0.1937 36.03 16.66 32.78 47.00 6.80 7.32
10th UTSA 0.1913 33.12 13.99 30.73 53.05 6.17 6.89
11th Old Dominion 0.1911 35.78 16.67 33.27 50.03 6.29 5.26
12th FIU 0.1742 33.92 16.50 31.29 51.36 6.67 6.08
13th Fla. Atlantic 0.1654 35.76 19.21 33.43 47.40 7.00 7.08
14th Louisiana Tech 0.1345 28.10 14.65 25.69 58.30 5.38 5.64

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Western Ky. 0.1242 32.23 19.81 30.18 53.52 8.11 5.02
2nd Rice 0.1482 30.79 15.97 28.57 55.94 6.34 5.31
3rd UTEP 0.1788 35.13 17.25 31.90 49.35 7.16 5.41
4th FIU 0.1813 33.89 15.75 31.51 49.23 7.39 6.30
5th UTSA 0.1979 34.84 15.05 31.61 52.04 4.78 6.63
6th UAB 0.2047 36.40 15.93 32.93 48.44 5.65 5.73
7th Marshall 0.2058 35.63 15.05 33.32 49.06 6.74 5.96
8th Charlotte 0.2109 36.38 15.29 33.87 49.55 6.47 6.36
9th North Texas 0.2127 35.71 14.43 32.27 50.11 5.94 8.29
10th Southern Miss. 0.2188 36.22 14.35 33.12 50.83 4.51 6.65
11th Fla. Atlantic 0.2240 37.72 15.32 34.43 48.85 6.74 8.43
12th Louisiana Tech 0.2304 37.23 14.19 34.81 47.23 5.11 6.18
13th Middle Tenn. 0.2341 37.55 14.14 33.62 50.78 4.60 6.94
14th Old Dominion 0.2371 38.89 15.19 35.67 45.68 6.55 7.46

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,429.1330 1,423.7486 1,415.2250 1,411.2732 1,419.8449
Difference -5.3844 -13.9080 -17.8598 -12.3841

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Western Ky. 97 2,339 1,278 169 217 54.64 13.8 10.8 1,777 679 93 175 61.79 19.1 10.2
Rice 93 1,836 842 104 160 45.86 17.7 11.5 1,657 660 110 199 60.17 15.1 8.3
UTEP 127 2,582 1,296 222 333 50.19 11.6 7.8 2,382 1,100 146 213 53.82 16.3 11.2
Southern Miss. 108 2,122 1,079 148 148 50.85 14.3 14.3 2,042 991 156 201 51.47 13.1 10.2
Charlotte 91 1,821 901 137 166 49.48 13.3 11.0 1,777 856 126 145 51.83 14.1 12.3
North Texas 98 2,070 1,046 138 148 50.53 15.0 14.0 2,015 1,022 172 188 49.28 11.7 10.7
Middle Tenn. 83 1,520 745 131 181 49.01 11.6 8.4 1,607 792 114 148 50.72 14.1 10.9
UAB 90 1,879 901 136 216 47.95 13.8 8.7 1,938 953 123 147 50.83 15.8 13.2
UTSA 87 1,632 830 120 174 50.86 13.6 9.4 1,725 909 132 182 47.30 13.1 9.5
Louisiana Tech 98 1,949 1,013 130 194 51.98 15.0 10.0 2,142 1,163 130 169 45.71 16.5 12.7
Old Dominion 96 1,714 797 121 180 46.50 14.2 9.5 1,858 914 162 194 50.81 11.5 9.6
Marshall 103 1,691 821 119 115 48.55 14.2 14.7 1,753 901 117 161 48.60 15.0 10.9
Fla. Atlantic 90 1,619 790 136 172 48.80 11.9 9.4 1,749 955 166 147 45.40 10.5 11.9
FIU 80 1,607 773 108 152 48.10 14.9 10.6 1,724 934 111 143 45.82 15.5 12.1
Conference Average 96 1,884 937 137 183 49.52 13.9 10.7 1,868 916 133 172 50.97 14.4 11.0
  • 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

73.50

2021-10-03 Houston, Texas
Rice
UTEP
3
2
25
27
25
23
25
20
21
25
15
10
GAME

71.87

2021-11-21 Norfolk, VA
Rice
Western Ky.
1
3
25
16
14
25
22
25
20
25
GAME

71.59

2021-10-30
UTSA
UTEP
3
2
25
21
14
25
21
25
32
30
19
17
GAME

71.56

2021-10-30
FIU
Charlotte
3
2
17
25
25
22
19
25
25
21
18
16
GAME

69.70

2021-10-16
Southern Miss.
UTEP
2
3
26
28
25
15
16
25
25
22
9
15
GAME

68.90

2021-10-22
Charlotte
Marshall
3
2
20
25
25
19
25
18
20
25
15
12
GAME

68.86

2021-10-29
UAB
Rice
1
3
23
25
13
25
25
23
20
25
GAME

68.51

2021-10-16
UAB
North Texas
1
3
24
26
25
15
23
25
25
27
GAME

68.20

2021-10-09
Middle Tenn.
FIU
3
2
25
20
27
29
25
22
18
25
16
14
GAME

68.15

2021-09-25
UAB
Southern Miss.
3
1
25
19
28
30
25
23
25
21

HuskerGeek C-USA All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
A
D
S
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 20.8778
2 19.6968
3 19.3727
4 19.2724
5 18.9413
6 18.6657
7 18.2510
8 17.8927
9 17.7754
10 17.7287

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 15.3750
2 13.8698
3 13.1469
4 12.7487
5 11.9932
6 11.3346
7 11.2846
8 10.9138
9 10.5951
10 10.5410

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 15.7976
2 12.6088
3 12.5904
4 11.9478
5 11.4234
6 11.0286
7 10.5422
8 10.1844
9 10.1628
10 10.0749

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2539
2 0.2484
3 0.2462
4 0.2440
5 0.2400
6 0.2348
7 0.2239
8 0.2040
9 0.1965
10 0.1953

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1713
2 0.1614
3 0.1594
4 0.1585
5 0.1417
6 0.1399
7 0.1355
8 0.1312
9 0.1252
10 0.1252

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1538
2 0.1523
3 0.1464
4 0.1411
5 0.1398
6 0.1345
7 0.1334
8 0.1323
9 0.1258
10 0.1095


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