2026 AAC Volleyball Championship
Bracketology·Conference Races·At-Large Odds·NCAA Bracket— auto-bid races, conference by conference.
Reflects results through the preseason. Seeds appear as they clinch; matchups and winners as games are played.
🏟 American Athletic
Quarterfinals
Semifinals
Championship
American Athletic Tournament Projections(13 teams · 10k simulations)
| Seed | Team | Elo | Quarters | Semis | Final | 🏆 Win |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rice | 1855 | 99% | 77% | 51% | 31% |
| 2 | Tulsa | 1830 | 98% | 74% | 48% | 28% |
| 3 | Wichita St. | 1731 | 91% | 53% | 27% | 12% |
| 4 | South Florida | 1730 | 93% | 55% | 26% | 12% |
| 5 | Fla. Atlantic | 1647 | 82% | 38% | 15% | 6% |
| 6 | North Texas | 1639 | 79% | 36% | 15% | 6% |
| 7 | Charlotte | 1509 | 50% | 14% | 4% | 1% |
| 8 | UAB | 1510 | 52% | 14% | 4% | 1% |
| 9 | UTSA | 1496 | 43% | 12% | 3% | 1% |
| 10 | Temple | 1507 | 50% | 13% | 4% | 1% |
| 11 | East Carolina | 1475 | 37% | 10% | 3% | 1% |
| 12 | Tulane | 1390 | 15% | 3% | 1% | — |
| 13 | Memphis | 1337 | 10% | 1% | — | — |
Values = P(reach that stage or further). Win = P(win conference tournament = auto NCAA bid). Seeds reflect average simulated finish position.
American Athletic Standings
8 qualify for tournamentPreseason projection · 104 games remainingStandings · Finishing Position Probabilities
| # | Team | Conf | Overall | Proj Conf | Proj Ovr | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rice | 0–0 | 0–0 | 12.3–3.7 11–14 W | 18.6–9.4 17–20 W | 35 | 24 | 15 | 10 | 7.2 | 4.3 | 2.4 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | <1 | <1 | |
| 2 | Tulsa | 0–0 | 0–0 | 12.2–3.8 11–14 W | 19.4–9.6 18–21 W | 32 | 24 | 16 | 11 | 7.0 | 4.6 | 2.9 | 1.4 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.1 | <1 |
| 3 | South Florida | 0–0 | 0–0 | 10.6–5.4 9–12 W | 15.4–13.6 14–17 W | 11 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 13 | 10 | 6.8 | 4.9 | 3.1 | 2.0 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.1 |
| 4 | Wichita St. | 0–0 | 0–0 | 10.3–5.7 9–12 W | 17.0–13.0 15–19 W | 11 | 14 | 16 | 14 | 13 | 10 | 8.6 | 5.7 | 3.8 | 2.6 | 1.3 | 0.7 | 0.2 |
| 5 | Fla. Atlantic | 0–0 | 0–0 | 9.2–6.8 8–11 W | 17.5–11.5 16–20 W | 4.7 | 8.3 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 12 | 11 | 8.5 | 6.6 | 5.0 | 3.5 | 1.8 | 0.8 |
| 6 | North Texas | 0–0 | 0–0 | 8.8–7.2 7–11 W | 16.0–11.0 14–18 W | 4.4 | 7.3 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 10 | 8.0 | 5.8 | 4.2 | 2.2 | 1.1 |
| 7 | UAB | 0–0 | 0–0 | 6.9–9.1 5–9 W | 14.8–14.2 13–17 W | 0.5 | 1.7 | 3.3 | 5.6 | 7.2 | 10 | 12 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 11 | 8.6 | 5.7 |
| 8 | Charlotte | 0–0 | 0–0 | 6.8–9.2 5–9 W | 12.7–14.3 11–15 W | 0.7 | 2.0 | 3.8 | 5.3 | 7.4 | 9.0 | 10 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 11 | 9.2 | 6.3 |
| 9 | Temple | 0–0 | 0–0 | 6.7–9.3 5–9 W | 14.9–14.1 13–17 W | 0.5 | 1.4 | 3.3 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 11 | 9.1 | 6.3 |
| 10 | UTSA | 0–0 | 0–0 | 6.4–9.6 4–8 W | 13.5–15.5 11–16 W | 0.5 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 4.4 | 5.9 | 7.8 | 10 | 11 | 13 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 7.6 |
| 11 | East Carolina | 0–0 | 0–0 | 5.8–10.2 4–8 W | 10.1–15.9 8–12 W | 0.2 | 0.9 | 2.1 | 3.5 | 4.7 | 6.6 | 8.3 | 10 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 14 | 11 |
| 12 | Tulane | 0–0 | 0–0 | 4.2–11.8 3–6 W | 8.4–18.6 7–10 W | <1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 1.4 | 2.5 | 3.8 | 5.7 | 8.6 | 13 | 16 | 22 | 26 |
| 13 | Memphis | 0–0 | 0–0 | 3.7–12.3 2–5 W | 7.9–21.1 6–9 W | <1 | <1 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 1.6 | 2.8 | 4.7 | 7.3 | 11 | 15 | 22 | 35 |
Position columns: % of 10,000 simulated seasons finishing there. Row below cut line = P(reach tournament).
Finishing Position Range — Season Progression
RiceTulsaSouth FloridaWichita St.Fla. AtlanticNorth TexasUABCharlotteTempleUTSAEast CarolinaTulaneMemphis