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