Conference USA Tempo Free Stats

Stats through 2/25/07


Tempo (possession per 40 minutes)

1. UTEP	73
2. Tulane	70.5
3. Memphis	68.4
4. Houston	67.6
5. Southern Miss	67.5
6. Marshall	67.3
7. Rice	66.6
8. Tulsa	66.2
9. UAB	64.1
10. East Carolina	64
11. UCF	63.4
12. SMU	63.3

Offensive Efficiency (points per possession)

1. Memphis	1.15
2. Houston	1.06
3. UCF	1.05
4. Rice	1.02
5. Tulane	1.01
6. UTEP	0.99
7. Southern Miss	0.98
8. UAB	0.97
9. Tulsa	0.96
10. SMU	0.93
11. Marshall	0.92
12. East Carolina	0.85

Effective FG %

1. Memphis	53.2%
2. UCF	51%
3. Rice	50.3%
4. Tulane	49.5%
5. Houston	49%
6. UAB	47.3%
7. SMU	46.4%
8. UTEP	46.1%
9. Southern Miss	45.1%
10. Tulsa	44.3%
11. East Carolina	43.3%
12. Marshall	42%

2-pt Shooting %

1. Memphis	51%
2. UAB	49.8%
3. UCF	49.4%
4. Rice	48.2%
5. Houston	47.8%
6. Tulane	47.2%
7. UTEP	44.2%
8. Southern Miss	43.4%
9. SMU	42.9%
10. Marshall	41.8%
11. East Carolina	40.2%
12. Tulsa	39.8%

3-pt Shooting %

1. Memphis	38.2%
2. Tulane	37.9%
3. Rice	36.9%
4. UCF	35.8%
5. Tulsa	35%
6. SMU	34.1%
7. Southern Miss	33.5%
8. Houston	33.4%
9. UTEP	33.3%
10. East Carolina	32.2%
11. UAB	29.3%
12. Marshall	28.2%

Turnover %

1. Houston	16.8%
2. Memphis	17.3%
3. UAB	19.9%
4. UTEP	20%
5. Rice	20.3%
6. Southern Miss	21.1%
7. Tulane	22.5%
8. UCF	22.7%
9. East Carolina	23.2%
10. Marshall	23.5%
11. Tulsa	23.5%
12. SMU	25.2%

Offensive Rebounding %

1. Marshall	36.1%
2. Memphis	35.3%
3. Tulsa	32%
4. Southern Miss	31.9%
5. UCF	31.3%
6. SMU	30.8%
7. UAB	29.6%
8. UTEP	29.6%
9. Tulane	28.9%
10. Houston	26.7%
11. Rice	26.5%
12. East Carolina	25.9%

Efficiency Margin

1. Memphis	0.29
2. Houston	0.06
3. UCF	0.04
4. UTEP	0.02
5. Tulane	0.02
6. UAB	0
7. Southern Miss	0
8. Tulsa	-0.01
9. Rice	-0.02
10. Marshall	-0.08
11. SMU	-0.11
12. East Carolina	-0.23

Defensive Numbers


Points per possession Allowed

1. Memphis	0.85
2. UTEP	0.96
3. UAB	0.97
4. Tulsa	0.97
5. Southern Miss	0.98
6. Marshall	0.99
7. Tulane	0.99
8. Houston	1
9. UCF	1.01
10. SMU	1.04
11. Rice	1.05
12. East Carolina	1.08

Effective Shooting % Allowed

1. Memphis	42.2%
2. Tulane	44%
3. Tulsa	44.5%
4. UAB	44.7%
5. Marshall	45.7%
6. UCF	47%
7. Southern Miss	47.2%
8. UTEP	48.1%
9. East Carolina	50.3%
10. Houston	51.3%
11. Rice	51.6%
12. SMU	52%

2-pt Shooting % Allowed

1. Tulsa	40.6%
2. Tulane	41.3%
3. Memphis	41.5%
4. UAB	43.7%
5. Southern Miss	44.3%
6. Marshall	44.5%
7. UTEP	45.4%
8. UCF	46.2%
9. Houston	48.8%
10. East Carolina	49.8%
11. Rice	50.1%
12. SMU	52.6%

3-pt Shooting % Allowed

1. Memphis	29.1%
2. UAB	30.8%
3. Marshall	31.8%
4. UCF	32.3%
5. SMU	34%
6. Tulane	34.1%
7. East Carolina	34.1%
8. Southern Miss	34.8%
9. UTEP	35.4%
10. Rice	35.9%
11. Tulsa	36%
12. Houston	37.1%

Turnover % Forced

1. Memphis	25.4%
2. Houston	24.9%
3. UTEP	24.6%
4. Rice	22.3%
5. UCF	20.9%
6. Southern Miss	20.5%
7. Marshall	20.1%
8. East Carolina	19.7%
9. UAB	19.6%
10. SMU	19.6%
11. Tulsa	19%
12. Tulane	18.5%

Defensive Rebounding %

1. Southern Miss	79.5%
2. Tulsa	78.6%
3. UTEP	76%
4. Houston	75.8%
5. Tulane	75.8%
6. East Carolina	74.9%
7. SMU	74.1%
8. Rice	73.6%
9. Memphis	72.6%
10. Marshall	71.7%
11. UAB	71%
12. UCF	69.1%