D-III T&F Rankings: Wartburg women now No. 1 in Division III

By Tom Lewis, USTFCCCA

February 9, 2011   

NEW ORLEANS – The women of Wartburg are the new No.1 team in Division III indoor track & field, according to the latest national computer rankings calculated by the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association (USTFCCCA). Wartburg is the two-time defending NCAA champions in D-III women’s indoor track & field and is making their first appearance of the year on top of the field. On the men’s side, North Central (Ill.) holds on to a strong position at No. 1 for the third-straight week.

National Computer Rankings:
PDFs:
Top 25 | Full by Team | Event-by-Event | Week-by-Week
Previous Rankings | Rankings Guidelines & Rationale
Regional Index: Top 10 Teams by Region
Dual Meet RPI: Website

Women’s No. 1 Wartburg (193.64) took the nation’s top spot from now-No. 2 UW Oshkosh (154.28) by recording the division’s leading performances in the 55-meter dash (Faith Burt, 7.12), 400-meter dash (Nevada Morrison, 55.94), and 4×400-meter relay (3:50.65) last weekend.

Williams (100.01) remains at No. 3 while Illinois Wesleyan (88.98) jumped two spots to No. 4. For the remainder of the top 25, it remains a roller-coaster ride.

On the men’s side, defending champions North Central (Ill.) (218.27) remains at No. 1. UW La Crosse (118.67) stayed at No. 2, but now-No. 3 UW Whitewater improved six spots from the previous weekend. The Warhawks now have the nation’s leader in the triple jump with sophomore Marcus Smith who leaped to 49-3¾ (15.03m) last weekend.

USTFCCCA

NCAA Division III

Men’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2011 Week #3 – February 9

next ranking: February 16 (Week 4)
Rank School Points Last Week
1 North Central (Ill.) 218.27 1
2 UW La Crosse 118.67 2
3 UW Whitewater 101.45 9
4 UW Stevens Point 87.50 12
5 UW Oshkosh 86.86 5
6 Haverford 86.73 3
7 SUNY Geneseo 77.70 4
8 Washington (Mo.) 61.46 15
9 Bates 55.90 11
10 Amherst 55.63 6
11 Monmouth (Ill.) 48.48 18
12 Farmingdale State 45.63 10
13 Nebraska Wesleyan 45.24 22
14 Wartburg 45.16 7
15 Baldwin-Wallace 44.41 25
16 UW Eau Claire 44.40 55
17 TCNJ 36.79 13
18 St. Thomas (Minn.) 35.37 38
19 Chicago 35.21 16
20 Buffalo State 33.82 61
21 Hamline 31.87 71
22 Mount Union 30.85 26
23 Central (Iowa) 30.80 72
24 Principia 28.10 51
25 Southern Maine 27.24 8
Dropped out: No. 14 Augustana (Ill.), No. 17 Whitworth, No. 19 Illinois Wesleyan, No. 21 Rose-Hulman, No. 23 SUNY Cortland, No. 24 Springfield (Mass.)
Men’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC 488.10 5
2 CCIW 270.65 1
3 SUNYAC 200.32 2
4 NESCAC 146.74 2
5 OAC 142.04 2
6 UAA 130.44 2
7 NJAC 90.32 1
8 MIAC 89.77 2
9 IIAC 89.04 2
10 Centennial 87.23 1

USTFCCCA

NCAA Division III

Women’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2011 Week #3 – February 9

next ranking: February 16 (Week 4)
Rank School Points Last Week
1 Wartburg 193.64 2
2 UW Oshkosh 154.28 1
3 Williams 100.01 3
4 Illinois Wesleyan 88.98 6
5 MIT 72.49 4
6 Ithaca 72.30 8
7 North Central (Ill.) 71.87 14
8 Carthage 63.11 25
9 Ramapo 60.65 5
10 Methodist 58.94 9
11 Keene State 55.57 10
12 Tufts 53.97 7
13 Wheaton (Mass.) 46.65 18
14 Illinois College 44.10 20
15 UW La Crosse 43.25 16
16 TCNJ 42.84 17
17 Gustavus Adolphus 41.70 12
18 Nebraska Wesleyan 41.67 15
19 Chicago 40.93 41
20 SUNY Geneseo 39.67 13
21 Johns Hopkins 35.05 11
22 UW Platteville 34.40 64
23 UW Whitewater 32.87 21
24 Farmingdale State 30.33 22
25 Moravian 29.45 31
Dropped out: No. 19 Greenville, No. 23 Calvin, No. 24 Amherst
Women’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC
310.94
4
2 IIAC
257.87
1
3 CCIW
228.01
3
4 NESCAC
217.01
2
5 NEWMAC
147.49
2
6 NJAC
137.33
2
7 UAA
116.82
1
8 OAC
93.79
9 Midwest Conference
85.44
1
10 USA South
75.86
1

 

About the Rankings
For more on the national team rankings and links to guideline and rationale information visit …
http://www.ustfccca.org/rankings/division-iii-rankings

Rankings are determined by a mathematical formula, which is based on current national descending order lists. This is what’s used to compile a team’s ranking. The purpose and methodology of the rankings is to create an index that showcases the teams that have the best potential of achieving the top spots in the national-title race.

The Regional Index is determined using a similar method as national rankings, but on a smaller scale, comparing teams versus others within the same region. The result is a ranking that showcases squads with better all-around team potential — a group makeup critical for conference or similar team-scored events. A team may achieve a better regional ranking than a counterpart that has a better national ranking. Historically, some teams are better national-championship teams than conference-championship teams, having a few elite athletes that score very well in a diverse environment where teams do not have entries in more than a few events. Some teams are better at conference championships or similar team-scored events where they enter, and are competitive, in many of the events.

How a team fares in a national championship, conference championship, or scored meet with only a couple or few teams (like a dual or triangular) can be very different, given the number of events, competition, scoring, and makeup of entries — thus the rationale behind each of the ranking systems. Similar arguments about team makeup and rankings can also be found in swimming & diving and wrestling as their sports also have a similar trichotomy when it comes to team theory.