D-I Week One Outdoor Rankings: No Change to Number Ones, LSU Women Move to No. 2

By Tom Lewis, USTFCCCA

April 5, 2011   

NEW ORLEANS – The U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association (USTFCCCA) released week one national computer rankings for NCAA Division I Outdoor Track & Field on Tuesday. Florida’s men and Texas A&M’s women remain in the top spots, a place both teams held in the preseason. The LSU women took over the No. 2 spot from Oregon who moved down to No. 3.

Clemson’s women are making their first-ever apperance (since rankings began in 2008) in the national outdoor top five. Arizona’s women are in the national outdoor top ten for the first time since rankings began as well.

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 #1 – April 5

next ranking: April 12
Rank School Points Last Week
1 Florida 404.85 1
2 Texas A&M 329.68 2
3 Texas Tech 282.77 3
4 Florida State 272.29 4
5 LSU 211.24 5
6 Mississippi State 183.65 8
7 Southern California 168.90 6
8 Stanford 158.15 7
9 Nebraska 154.04 9
10 Oregon 136.69 12
11 Minnesota 133.96 10
12 Kansas 126.55 26
13 Arkansas 123.70 14
14 Texas 114.28 17
15 BYU 113.14 11
16 Auburn 111.50 18
17 Oklahoma 111.32 15
18 Virginia Tech 105.10 16
19 Kansas State 98.74 19
20 South Carolina 92.17 20
21 UCLA 92.13 24
22 Georgia 90.82 23
23 Mississippi 88.10 13
24 Alabama 87.25 22
25 Princeton 84.23 30
dropped out: No. 21 Washington, No. 25 California
Men’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 SEC 1455.61 9
2 Big 12 1450.68 7
3 Pac-10 890.66 4
4 ACC 603.32 2
5 Big Ten 479.52 1
6 Mountain West 262.44 1
7 BIG EAST 225.12
8 Southland 180.85
9 Ivy League 141.71 1
10 Big South 114.18

USTFCCCA

NCAA Division I

Women’s Outdoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2011 Week #1 – April 5

next ranking: April 12
Rank School Points Last Week
1 Texas A&M 344.02 1
2 LSU 326.85 3
3 Oregon 306.54 2
4 Oklahoma 215.66 4
5 Clemson 209.01 6
6 Southern California 196.88 5
7 Texas 184.66 7
8 Florida State 158.95 8
9 Arkansas 152.25 9
10 Arizona 145.75 11
11 Tennessee 143.68 15
12 Auburn 140.67 10
13 Texas Tech 136.74 13
14 Baylor 129.96 24
15 Arizona State 116.27 16
16 Stanford 114.23 12
17 SMU 109.69 20
18 Washington State 106.69 22
19 BYU 102.46 17
20 Colorado 98.79 21
21 Miami (Fla.) 97.34 18
22 Penn State 97.29 19
23 Southern Illinois 95.29 25
24 TCU 92.09 27
25 UCF 84.83 45
droppped out: No. 14 Kansas, No. 23 Indiana
Women’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 Big 12
1389.69
6
2 Pac-10
1177.68
6
3 SEC
1044.65
4
4 ACC
783.86
3
5 Big Ten
398.26
1
6 Conference USA
346.48
2
7 Mountain West
314.71
2
8 BIG EAST
266.92
9 Missouri Valley
170.17
1
10 Big West
117.52

 

 

 

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.