Division III Indoor T&F Rankings: Week 2, February 2, 2011
National Computer Rankings:
PDFs: Top 25 | Full by Team | Event-by-Event
Previous Rankings | Rankings Guidelines & Rationale
Regional Index: Top 10 Teams by Region
Dual Meet Index: Website
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.
USTFCCCA |
|||
NCAA Division III |
|||
Men’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings |
|||
2011 Week #2 – February 2 |
|||
| next ranking: February 9 (Week 3) | |||
| Rank | School | Points | Last Week |
| 1 | North Central (Ill.) | 258.27 | 1 |
| 2 | UW La Crosse | 117.77 | 6 |
| 3 | Haverford | 108.81 | 4 |
| 4 | SUNY Geneseo | 99.04 | 12 |
| 5 | UW Oshkosh | 83.66 | 2 |
| 6 | Amherst | 70.74 | 13 |
| 7 | Wartburg | 68.60 | 17 |
| 8 | Southern Maine | 60.04 | 10 |
| 9 | UW Whitewater | 59.80 | 3 |
| 10 | Farmingdale State | 52.39 | 8 |
| 11 | Bates | 52.01 | 5 |
| 12 | UW Stevens Point | 49.90 | 14 |
| 13 | TCNJ | 45.04 | 7 |
| 14 | Augustana (Ill.) | 45.03 | 21 |
| 15 | Washington (Mo.) | 43.59 | 33 |
| 16 | Chicago | 40.15 | 11 |
| 17 | Whitworth | 34.40 | 20 |
| 18 | Monmouth (Ill.) | 33.33 | 19 |
| 19 | Illinois Wesleyan | 32.34 | 29 |
| 20 | St. Lawrence | 31.18 | 72 |
| 21 | Rose-Hulman | 30.63 | 16 |
| 22 | Nebraska Wesleyan | 29.61 | 22 |
| 23 | SUNY Cortland | 29.25 | 9 |
| 24 | Springfield (Mass.) | 28.11 | 15 |
| 25 | Baldwin-Wallace | 28.02 | 28 |
| Dropped out: No. 18 NYU, No. 23 Carthage, No. 24 SUNY Fredonia, No. 25 Ithaca | |||
Men’s Conference Index Top 10 |
|||
| Rank | Conference | Points | Top 25 Teams |
| 1 | CCIW | 360.35 | 3 |
| 2 | WIAC | 338.09 | 4 |
| 3 | SUNYAC | 208.97 | 2 |
| 4 | NESCAC | 151.17 | 2 |
| 5 | UAA | 117.54 | 2 |
| 6 | Centennial | 110.53 | 1 |
| 7 | OAC | 103.35 | 1 |
| 8 | NJAC | 100.32 | 1 |
| 9 | Little East | 100.11 | 1 |
| 10 | IIAC | 79.42 | 1 |
USTFCCCA |
|||
NCAA Division III |
|||
Women’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings |
|||
| 2011 Week #2 – February 2 | |||
| next ranking: February 9 (Week 3) | |||
| Rank | School | Points | Last Week |
| 1 | UW Oshkosh | 177.41 | 1 |
| 2 | Wartburg | 154.05 | 4 |
| 3 | Williams | 122.70 | 3 |
| 4 | MIT | 103.01 | 2 |
| 5 | Ramapo | 79.32 | 5 |
| 6 | Illinois Wesleyan | 72.82 | 7 |
| 7 | Tufts | 72.11 | 16 |
| 8 | Ithaca | 69.60 | 6 |
| 9 | Methodist | 64.95 | 9 |
| 10 | Keene State | 57.14 | 25 |
| 11 | Johns Hopkins | 50.11 | 8 |
| 12 | Gustavus Adolphus | 49.77 | 92 |
| 13 | SUNY Geneseo | 47.29 | 73 |
| 14 | North Central (Ill.) | 45.16 | 12 |
| 15 | Nebraska Wesleyan | 44.98 | 23 |
| 16 | UW La Crosse | 43.30 | 28 |
| 17 | TCNJ | 42.28 | 11 |
| 18 | Wheaton (Mass.) | 39.37 | 14 |
| 19 | Greenville | 37.61 | 42 |
| 20 | Illinois College | 36.93 | 19 |
| 21 | UW Whitewater | 36.04 | 17 |
| 22 | Farmingdale State | 33.81 | 22 |
| 23 | Calvin | 33.25 | 13 |
| 24 | Amherst | 32.82 | 40 |
| 25 | Carthage | 31.64 | 10 |
| Dropped out: No. 15 Emory, No. 18 Bowdoin, No. 20 Southern Maine, No. 21 SUNY Cortland, No. 24 Rose-Hulman | |||
| Women’s Conference Index Top 10 | |||
| Rank | Conference | Points | Top 25 Teams |
| 1 | WIAC | 296.36 | 3 |
| 2 | NESCAC | 265.15 | 3 |
| 3 | IIAC | 219.10 | 1 |
| 4 | NJAC | 162.95 | 2 |
| 5 | NEWMAC | 159.45 | 2 |
| 6 | CCIW | 155.18 | 3 |
| 7 | UAA | 105.24 | |
| 8 | USA South | 85.39 | 1 |
| 9 | Little East | 80.59 | 1 |
| 10 | SUNYAC | 77.58 | 1 |
