Lincoln, GVSU Still Tops in D-II; Southern Connecticut Men, U-Mary Women Rejoin Top Ten

By Tom Lewis, USTFCCCA

March 1, 2011   

NEW ORLEANS – As the dust settles on the conference championship weekend, the national team rankings for NCAA Division II indoor track & field still has the same teams at the top as was the week previous. The Blue Tigers of Lincoln University of Missouri lead the men’s standings for the third-straight week while the women of Grand Valley State hold to the No. 1 position for the seventh time in seven tries.

Rankings this week are a relection of all data reported to TFRRS through Sunday, Feb. 27. Next week’s rankings will only include those who declared and were accepted to compete in the NCAA Division II Indoor Championships. The NCAA will release the championship fields today (Tuesday, March 1) by Noon ET on flashresults.com.

PDFs: Top 25 | Full by Team | Event-by-Event | Week-by-Week
Previous Rankings
| Rankings Guidelines & Rationale
Regional Index: Top 10 Teams by Region

Division II Conference Championships Central

USTFCCCA

NCAA Division II

Men’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2011 Week #6 – March 1

next ranking: SUNDAY, March 6 (Week 7)
Rank School Points Last Week
1 Lincoln (Mo.) 182.73 1
2 Ashland 127.84 3
3 Saint Augustine’s 125.78 2
4 Adams State 115.82 6
5 Abilene Christian 114.73 5
6 Central Missouri 109.88 4
7 Emporia State 99.72 9
8 Southern Connecticut 98.76 12
9 Findlay 98.34 7
10 Johnson C. Smith 77.28 8
11 UMass Lowell 73.07 13
12 Chadron State 68.18 11
13 MSU Moorhead 63.26 18
14 American International 62.51 14
15 Grand Valley State 62.32 10
16 Shippensburg 58.39 30
17 Grand Canyon 54.81 16
18 Pittsburg State 52.78 22
19 Stonehill 48.19 19
20 Colorado Mines 47.86 15
21 Lake Erie 44.90 20
22 Western Washington 40.96 21
23 Queens (N.C.) 40.54 49
24 Western State 38.73 17
25 Augustana (S.D.) 33.65 23
Dropped out: No. 24 Bowie State, No. 25 Minnesota State
Men’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 MIAA 497.02 4
2 GLIAC 399.37 4
3 RMAC 331.88 4
4 Northeast-10 299.25 4
5 CIAA 251.92 2
6 NSIC 177.52 2
7 PSAC 142.10 1
8 Lone Star 120.65 1
9 GNAC 68.93 1
10 PacWest 54.81 1

USTFCCCA

NCAA Division II

Women’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2011 Week #6 – March 1

next ranking: SUNDAY, March 6 (Week 7)
Rank School Points Last Week
1 Grand Valley State 285.15 1
2 Lincoln (Mo.) 162.70 2
3 Ashland 159.15 3
4 Neb.-Omaha 131.57 4
5 Adams State 129.46 5
6 Johnson C. Smith 102.65 6
7 Central Missouri 99.29 8
8 Western State 75.11 7
9 Shippensburg 66.42 10
10 U-Mary 59.70 12
11 New Haven 59.66 9
12 Virginia State 46.27 13
13 Saint Augustine’s 46.15 11
14 Angelo State 42.81 14
15 Winona State 42.09 16
16 Augustana (S.D.) 38.82 24
17 Missouri Southern 38.78 18
18 Grand Canyon 38.50 15
19 Southern Connecticut 36.67 35
20 New Mexico Highlands 35.26 39
21 Wayne State (Neb.) 34.29 19
22 Fort Hays State 33.29 17
23 Chadron State 30.91 26
24 Western Washington 29.30 20
25 Findlay 27.14 25
Dropped out: No. 21 Pittsburg State, No. 22 Northern Michigan, No. 23 UMass Lowell
Women’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 GLIAC 540.97 3
2 MIAA 519.59 5
3 RMAC 338.82 4
4 NSIC 229.44 4
5 CIAA 206.71 3
6 PSAC 147.45 1
7 Northeast-10 144.18 2
8 Lone Star 69.53 1
9 GNAC 53.60 1
10 CCAA 42.84

 

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

The purpose and methodology of the national team computer 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 – not as a method to compare teams head-to-head.

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.