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

By Tom Lewis, USTFCCCA

April 12, 2011   

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.