Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

Conference USA - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Tulsa 1,524.9740 1,526.8560 1,525.9147 48.10 64.78 0.101
2nd Rice 1,474.0644 1,459.1178 1,466.5720 44.96 63.57 0.082
3rd UCF 1,446.4195 1,452.6072 1,449.5100 44.04 60.98 0.029
4th UAB 1,446.4693 1,450.9581 1,448.7120 44.89 60.45 0.053
5th UTEP 1,453.1920 1,432.3444 1,442.7305 43.70 62.43 0.066
6th Marshall 1,420.5124 1,410.9884 1,415.7424 42.97 58.87 0.003
7th SMU 1,394.6225 1,394.9537 1,394.7881 43.32 58.43 0.007
8th Houston 1,381.8314 1,378.6644 1,380.2470 41.37 58.25 0.014
9th Memphis 1,367.3427 1,364.4887 1,365.9149 39.58 57.11 -0.022
10th Tulane 1,346.6223 1,345.7748 1,346.1984 39.83 56.08 -0.029
11th Southern Miss. 1,331.3322 1,321.8192 1,326.5672 38.76 54.23 -0.080
12th East Carolina 1,258.5740 1,251.4767 1,255.0204 36.37 50.10 -0.135

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 UTEP 0.2542 40.13 14.71 36.95 44.61 5.70 4.76
2nd Rice 0.2499 38.73 13.74 36.43 46.98 5.59 4.07
3rd Tulsa 0.2430 37.93 13.63 35.23 48.17 5.38 5.89
4th UAB 0.2215 34.68 12.53 31.91 53.76 5.41 5.43
5th SMU 0.2166 37.39 15.73 34.53 46.81 6.49 6.73
6th UCF 0.2148 36.53 15.05 34.39 48.14 6.30 4.96
7th Houston 0.2018 35.17 14.99 32.78 51.63 4.46 5.10
8th Memphis 0.1959 36.56 16.97 34.21 47.73 6.80 6.08
9th Marshall 0.1918 34.24 15.06 31.89 50.73 5.43 6.23
10th Tulane 0.1894 35.59 16.65 33.40 49.04 6.69 5.35
11th Southern Miss. 0.1719 34.29 17.10 32.19 49.36 6.93 3.35
12th East Carolina 0.1119 28.69 17.49 26.38 55.90 6.00 5.16

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Tulsa 0.1418 29.38 15.20 27.98 57.90 5.01 2.56
2nd Rice 0.1680 32.34 15.55 30.60 53.58 6.18 4.67
3rd UAB 0.1681 32.93 16.13 30.28 51.54 6.62 4.45
4th UCF 0.1858 34.67 16.09 32.28 51.31 6.31 4.09
5th Houston 0.1878 34.70 15.92 32.40 51.11 6.16 5.59
6th UTEP 0.1882 36.01 17.19 34.01 48.81 6.90 5.03
7th Marshall 0.1889 33.88 14.99 31.40 52.37 4.28 4.02
8th SMU 0.2099 36.07 15.08 33.84 48.17 6.44 5.28
9th Memphis 0.2175 36.40 14.65 33.26 49.91 5.35 6.49
10th Tulane 0.2184 36.40 14.56 33.38 50.06 5.63 6.71
11th East Carolina 0.2467 39.72 15.04 36.90 46.91 5.61 7.38
12th Southern Miss. 0.2520 39.47 14.27 36.57 46.78 5.05 4.61

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,401.4931 1,403.6983 1,405.4804 1,408.0225 1,404.6736
Difference 2.2051 3.9873 6.5293 4.2406

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Tulsa 131 2,988 1,354 164 270 45.32 18.2 11.1 2,682 1,034 70 195 61.45 38.3 13.8
Rice 114 2,588 1,116 95 155 43.12 27.2 16.7 2,421 944 117 199 61.01 20.7 12.2
UAB 129 2,829 1,252 147 214 44.26 19.2 13.2 2,686 1,097 118 195 59.16 22.8 13.8
UCF 118 2,632 1,150 127 180 43.69 20.7 14.6 2,500 1,009 106 230 59.64 23.6 10.9
UTEP 109 2,428 1,038 109 222 42.75 22.3 10.9 2,301 909 118 205 60.50 19.5 11.2
Marshall 118 2,558 1,115 159 271 43.59 16.1 9.4 2,485 1,031 99 216 58.51 25.1 11.5
SMU 117 2,395 991 156 253 41.38 15.4 9.5 2,479 1,089 137 220 56.07 18.1 11.3
Memphis 121 2,561 1,020 149 272 39.83 17.2 9.4 2,679 1,157 166 221 56.81 16.1 12.1
Southern Miss. 105 2,151 872 76 100 40.54 28.3 21.5 2,334 1,063 110 148 54.46 21.2 15.8
Tulane 109 2,245 893 117 200 39.78 19.2 11.2 2,431 1,089 165 209 55.20 14.7 11.6
Houston 104 2,135 827 99 203 38.74 21.6 10.5 2,350 1,049 131 174 55.36 17.9 13.5
East Carolina 99 1,913 729 100 145 38.11 19.1 13.2 2,285 1,130 166 198 50.55 13.8 11.5
Conference Average 115 2,452 1,030 125 207 41.76 20.4 12.6 2,469 1,050 125 201 57.39 21.0 12.4
  • 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 Conference USA

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

74.79

2012-09-30 Houston, Texas
Rice
Tulsa
2
3
26
24
21
25
25
22
23
25
10
15
GAME

71.45

2012-11-04 El Paso, Texas
UTEP
Tulsa
3
2
25
17
18
25
25
16
25
27
15
11
GAME

69.93

2012-10-07 Orlando, Fla.
UCF
Tulsa
3
1
25
22
19
25
26
24
28
26
GAME

69.77

2012-09-28 Houston, Texas
Rice
SMU
3
2
25
20
25
21
19
25
25
27
15
10
GAME

69.45

2012-10-14 Birmingham, Ala.
UAB
UCF
3
2
25
18
25
18
22
25
23
25
15
6
GAME

69.44

2012-11-09 Tulsa, Okla.
Tulsa
Rice
3
1
25
22
19
25
25
12
25
19
GAME

69.32

2012-10-05 Orlando, Fla.
UCF
SMU
1
3
25
16
23
25
21
25
27
29
GAME

68.92

2012-10-21 El Paso, Texas
UTEP
Rice
2
3
25
20
29
31
13
25
25
19
11
15
GAME

68.71

2012-09-23 Birmingham, Ala.
UAB
Rice
2
3
25
21
19
25
25
27
25
22
12
15
GAME

68.50

2012-11-01 New Orleans, La.
Tulane
Tulsa
2
3
25
23
22
25
25
21
14
25
7
15

HuskerGeek Conference USA All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
S
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
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 26.8999
2 26.7168
3 23.9337
4 23.2594
5 22.5351
6 22.4146
7 21.5813
8 20.9807
9 20.5189
10 20.3334

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 20.2049
2 18.3495
3 14.8526
4 14.4525
5 14.3593
6 14.2099
7 13.3977
8 12.7543
9 12.0334
10 11.8847

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 20.9344
2 19.8225
3 16.1936
4 15.7064
5 15.5863
6 15.1396
7 14.2187
8 14.1620
9 13.8527
10 13.7449

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2360
2 0.2196
3 0.2134
4 0.2087
5 0.1938
6 0.1840
7 0.1829
8 0.1814
9 0.1791
10 0.1768

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1610
2 0.1579
3 0.1363
4 0.1326
5 0.1269
6 0.1217
7 0.1170
8 0.1114
9 0.1110
10 0.1056

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1598
2 0.1537
3 0.1342
4 0.1338
5 0.1321
6 0.1319
7 0.1286
8 0.1249
9 0.1247
10 0.1216


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