In D-III, McMurry, Wartburg Lead Halfway Through Outdoor Season
NEW ORLEANS – The fourth week of national team computer rankings of the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association (USTFCCCA) for the 2011 NCAA Division III outdoor track & field season were released on Wednesday. The top two men’s teams remain the same as McMurry holds to No. 1 and North Central (Ill.) keeps at No. 2. Haverford made a 15-spot jump to jump the men’s top three. On the women’s side, the top four teams stayed put with No. 1 Wartburg leading the way once again.
National Computer Rankings:
PDFs: Top 25 | Full by Team | Full 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 Outdoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings |
|||
2011 Week #4 – April 27 |
|||
| next ranking: May 4 | |||
| Rank | School | Points | Last Week |
| 1 | McMurry | 230.73 | 1 |
| 2 | North Central (Ill.) | 132.92 | 2 |
| 3 | Haverford | 113.98 | 18 |
| 4 | Washington (Mo.) | 112.21 | 6 |
| 5 | Central (Iowa) | 110.53 | 4 |
| 6 | UW La Crosse | 107.21 | 3 |
| 7 | La Verne | 104.47 | 5 |
| 8 | Nebraska Wesleyan | 92.64 | 22 |
| 9 | UW Whitewater | 91.85 | 12 |
| 10 | Whitworth | 87.33 | 7 |
| 11 | UW Oshkosh | 76.56 | 9 |
| 12 | Redlands | 75.43 | 8 |
| 13 | Monmouth (Ill.) | 72.88 | 11 |
| 14 | Augustana (Ill.) | 69.86 | 10 |
| 15 | Baldwin-Wallace | 67.52 | 16 |
| 16 | UW Stout | 67.23 | 14 |
| 17 | Cal Lutheran | 65.43 | 15 |
| 18 | Moravian | 64.24 | 13 |
| 19 | Buffalo State | 57.84 | 176 |
| 20 | Claremont-Mudd-Scripps | 55.88 | 17 |
| 21 | Middlebury | 51.66 | 68 |
| 22 | Bates | 47.80 | 20 |
| 23 | Williams | 44.16 | 36 |
| 24 | Rose-Hulman | 43.91 | 25 |
| 25 | NYU | 42.99 | 42 |
| dropped out: No. 19 Wabash, No. 21 Willamette, No. 23 UW Platteville, No. 24 Dickinson | |||
| Men’s Conference Index Top 10 | |||
| Rank | Conference | Points | Top 25 Teams |
| 1 | WIAC | 430.73 | 4 |
| 2 | SCIAC | 345.09 | 4 |
| 3 | ASC | 256.08 | 1 |
| 4 | CCIW | 247.97 | 2 |
| 5 | UAA | 237.92 | 2 |
| 6 | OAC | 217.76 | 1 |
| 7 | NESCAC | 190.34 | 3 |
| 8 | Centennial | 154.90 | 1 |
| 9 | Northwest Conference | 152.86 | 1 |
| 10 | IIAC | 146.85 | 1 |
USTFCCCA |
|||
NCAA Division III |
|||
Women’s Outdoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings |
|||
2011 Week #4 – April 27 |
|||
| next ranking: May 4 | |||
| Rank | School | Points | Last Week |
| 1 | Wartburg | 237.42 | 1 |
| 2 | UW Oshkosh | 204.55 | 2 |
| 3 | Claremont-Mudd-Scripps | 116.67 | 3 |
| 4 | Methodist | 111.54 | 4 |
| 5 | Williams | 105.33 | 15 |
| 6 | Nebraska Wesleyan | 93.82 | 30 |
| 7 | Central (Iowa) | 84.07 | 5 |
| 8 | MIT | 80.47 | 8 |
| 9 | George Fox | 80.36 | 12 |
| 10 | Texas Lutheran | 78.62 | 7 |
| 11 | Whitworth | 68.98 | 6 |
| 12 | Ithaca | 68.35 | 13 |
| 13 | Illinois Wesleyan | 66.81 | 26 |
| 14 | Middlebury | 63.35 | 34 |
| 15 | Calvin | 61.60 | 9 |
| 16 | Illinois College | 61.00 | 14 |
| 17 | North Central (Ill.) | 60.86 | 11 |
| 18 | UW Eau Claire | 50.77 | 22 |
| 19 | Buffalo State | 49.42 | |
| 20 | Rhodes | 48.52 | 10 |
| 21 | Centre | 46.73 | 27 |
| 22 | UW La Crosse | 46.42 | 17 |
| 23 | Moravian | 45.17 | 33 |
| 24 | Linfield | 44.78 | 18 |
| 25 | Monmouth (Ill.) | 44.69 | 20 |
| dropped out: No. 16 Carthage, No. 19 Willamette, No. 21 UW Platteville, No. 23 UW Whitewater, No. 24 Greenville | |||
| Women’s Conference Index Top 10 | |||
| Rank | Conference |
Points
|
Top 25 Teams
|
| 1 | WIAC |
422.90
|
3
|
| 2 | IIAC |
416.61
|
2
|
| 3 | Northwest Conference |
227.02
|
3
|
| 4 | NESCAC |
222.85
|
2
|
| 5 | SCIAC |
221.05
|
1
|
| 6 | CCIW |
191.49
|
2
|
| 7 | UAA |
161.48
|
|
| 8 | SCAC |
160.26
|
2
|
| 9 | NEWMAC |
139.16
|
1
|
| 10 | MIAC |
135.04
|
|
About the Rankings
For more on the national team rankings and links to guideline and rationale information visit …
/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.
