D-I National Computer Rankings Hold Previous Week’s Top Three

Follow @USTFCCCA

NEW ORLEANS – The U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association (USTFCCCA) released week two national computer rankings for NCAA Division I Outdoor Track & Field on Tuesday. The top eight men’s teams remain unchanged from a week ago while the top three women’s squads remain in their previous-week positions. The Women of Troy at Southern California moved to their highest post of the season at No. 4.

Also on the women’s side, Georgia is making their first-ever appearance in the national outdoor computer rankings’ top 25.

PDFs: Top 25 | Full by Team | Event-by-Event | Week-by-Week
Previous Rankings | Rankings Guidelines & Rationale
Regional Index Top 15

USTFCCCA
NCAA Division I
Men’s Outdoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings
2011 Week #2 – April 12
next ranking: April 19
Rank	School	Points	Last Week
1	Florida	379.02	1
2	Texas A&M	337.08	2
3	Texas Tech	273.22	3
4	Florida State	269.27	4
5	LSU	228.29	5
6	Mississippi State	182.41	6
7	Southern California	181.82	7
8	Stanford	157.37	8
9	Texas	154.46	14
10	Nebraska	147.07	9
11	Oregon	137.22	10
12	Arkansas	128.84	13
13	Minnesota	127.24	11
14	Kansas	124.64	12
15	BYU	120.76	15
16	Virginia Tech	108.16	18
17	Oklahoma	107.72	17
18	Auburn	107.30	16
19	Baylor	100.76	31
20	Mississippi	98.95	23
21	Georgia	98.42	22
22	South Carolina	90.93	20
23	UCLA	87.60	21
24	Kansas State	85.54	19
25	Alabama	84.82	24
dropped out: No. 25 Princeton
Men’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank	Conference	Points	Top 25 Teams
1	Big 12	1504.34	8
2	SEC	1455.32	9
3	Pac-10	895.63	4
4	ACC	587.33	2
5	Big Ten	426.79	1
6	Mountain West	251.97	1
7	Southland	218.99
8	BIG EAST	213.96
9	Ivy League	145.90
10	Big South	117.89
USTFCCCA
NCAA Division I
Women’s Outdoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings
2011 Week #2 – April 12
next ranking: April 19
Rank	School	Points	Last Week
1	Texas A&M	353.28	1
2	LSU	344.09	2
3	Oregon	301.09	3
4	Southern California	223.36	6
5	Clemson	221.15	5
6	Texas	214.98	7
7	Oklahoma	206.18	4
8	Arkansas	155.97	9
9	Arizona	154.78	10
10	Florida State	147.99	8
11	Auburn	140.40	12
12	Baylor	140.28	14
13	Tennessee	138.63	11
14	Arizona State	132.88	15
15	Texas Tech	126.17	13
16	Stanford	101.96	16
17	Colorado	99.74	20
18	Washington State	98.45	18
19	Georgia	95.89	31
20	Washington	93.25	32
21	Miami (Fla.)	92.91	21
22	Southern Illinois	92.01	23
23	Penn State	88.77	22
24	TCU	88.39	24
25	Kansas	87.34	26
droppped out: No. 17 SMU, No. 19 BYU, No. 25 UCF
Women’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank	Conference	Points	Top 25 Teams
1	Big 12	1437.75	7
2	Pac-10	1226.44	7
3	SEC	1054.43	5
4	ACC	791.55	3
5	Big Ten	369.77	1
6	Conference USA	330.76
7	Mountain West	293.10	1
8	BIG EAST	273.20
9	Missouri Valley	160.19	1
10	Ivy League	101.32

 

 

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.