Division III National Rankings Keep North Central Men, Move UW Oshkosh Women To Top

By Tom Lewis, USTFCCCA

February 16, 2011   

North Central (Ill.)’s men stays atop the men’s computer rankings for another week. On the women’s side, UW Oshkosh move back ahead of Wartburg for the national top spot.

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

USTFCCCA

NCAA Division III

Men’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2011 Week #4 – February 16

next ranking: February 23 (Week 5)
Rank School Points Last Week
1 North Central (Ill.) 199.59 1
2 UW La Crosse 129.10 2
3 Amherst 103.54 10
4 UW Stevens Point 92.51 4
5 SUNY Cortland 77.81 36
6 Central (Iowa) 77.41 23
7 UW Whitewater 73.79 3
8 Nebraska Wesleyan 72.82 13
9 SUNY Geneseo 61.39 7
10 UW Oshkosh 58.96 5
11 Buffalo State 42.58 20
12 Haverford 42.19 6
13 Farmingdale State 41.91 12
14 MIT 41.11 56
15 Baldwin-Wallace 39.05 15
16 Bates 38.61 9
17 St. Thomas (Minn.) 38.54 18
18 Wartburg 38.28 14
19 Allegheny 37.68 55
20 Washington (Mo.) 36.00 8
21 NYU 34.95 43
22 UW Eau Claire 32.21 16
23 UW Platteville 31.52 35
24 Springfield (Mass.) 27.08 38
25 Chicago 26.96 19
Dropped out: No. 11 Monmouth (Ill.), No. 17 TCNJ, No. 21 Hamline, No. 22 Mount Union, No. 24 Principia, No. 25 Southern Maine
Men’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC 443.71 6
2 SUNYAC 257.76 3
3 CCIW 240.93 1
4 NESCAC 197.75 2
5 IIAC 131.71 2
6 OAC 124.88 1
7 UAA 110.58 3
8 MIAC 99.19 1
9 NJAC 77.31
10 NEWMAC 76.78 2

USTFCCCA

NCAA Division III

Women’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2011 Week #4 – February 16

next ranking: February 23 (Week 5)
Rank School Points Last Week
1 UW Oshkosh 187.25 2
2 Wartburg 182.72 1
3 MIT 104.67 5
4 Williams 100.63 3
5 TCNJ 71.02 16
6 Ithaca 67.38 6
7 Ramapo 60.38 9
8 Wellesley 59.58 34
9 North Central (Ill.) 56.68 7
10 Middlebury 53.94 32
11 UW La Crosse 49.09 15
12 Methodist 48.79 10
13 Illinois College 46.31 14
14 Wheaton (Mass.) 43.87 13
15 Amherst 43.22 27
16 Monmouth (Ill.) 42.87 46
17 Chicago 40.63 19
18 Illinois Wesleyan 39.53 4
19 Gustavus Adolphus 38.43 17
20 Tufts 37.90 12
21 Nebraska Wesleyan 37.15 18
22 Carthage 33.80 8
23 UW Whitewater 31.68 23
24 Moravian 31.21 25
25 Keene State 29.52 11
Dropped out: No. 20 SUNY Geneseo, No. 21 Johns Hopkins, No. 22 UW Platteville, No. 24 Farmingdale State
Women’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference
Points
Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC
349.93
3
2 IIAC
267.71
1
3 NESCAC
251.26
4
4 NEWMAC
213.67
3
5 NJAC
184.56
2
6 CCIW
132.79
3
7 Midwest Conference
119.66
2
8 OAC
117.39
9 UAA
94.75
1
10 Empire 8
68.23
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.