DIII Indoor Track & Field Preseason Top Teams are North Central, Wartburg

By Tom Lewis, USTFCCCA

January 11, 2012   

NEW ORLEANS – The men’s team at North Central College and the women’s team at Warburg College head preseason national team computer rankings released by the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association (USTFCCCA) on Wednesday. North Central is the winner of the past two men’s NCAA DIII indoor titles and Wartburg has won the national crown in two of the last three years indoors.

National Computer Rankings:
PDFs:
Top 25 | Full by Team | Event-by-Event
Previous Rankings

USTFCCCA preseason rankings were compiled for the first time ever in Division III. Teams are scored using similar methods employed as the previous two years, but, with preseason scoring, early-season scoring largely comes from previous season data. Preseason data will mix with information from the current season through week three. This method has been used in Division I for the past four years and enters a second year in Division II.

The men’s heptathlon is in the NCAA Division III program of championship events for the first time starting this year, replacing the pentathlon. The heptathlon was not scored in this week’s team rankings due to lack of participation in this early part of the year.

The next round of computer rankings will be released on January 25. The 2012 NCAA Division III Indoor Track & Field Championships will be held in Grinnell, Iowa, on March 9-10.

USTFCCCA NCAA Division III

Men’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2012 Preseason — January 11

next ranking: January 25
Rank School Points Conference 2011 FINAL
1 North Central (Ill.) 177.86 CCIW 1
2 UW-La Crosse 149.60 WIAC 3
3 UW-Oshkosh 110.98 WIAC 4
4 Amherst 73.08 NESCAC 6
5 McMurry 71.25 ASC 12
6 SUNY Geneseo 63.40 SUNYAC 42
7 UW-Whitewater 61.99 WIAC 10
8 Wabash 59.00 NCAC 23
9 Central (Iowa) 55.00 IIAC 2
10 MIT 53.37 NEWMAC 28
11 Wartburg 49.16 IIAC 21
12 St. Thomas (Minn.) 44.39 MIAC 36
13 Hamline 37.49 MIAC 36
14 UW-Eau Claire 36.56 WIAC 14
15 Haverford 35.41 Centennial 29
16 Methodist 34.53 USA South 36
17 UW-Stevens Point 33.80 WIAC 10
18 Springfield (Mass.) 33.61 NEWMAC 9
19 UW-Platteville 32.99 WIAC 62
20 Bates 31.41 NESCAC 7
21 NYU 31.27 UAA 26
22 Nebraska Wesleyan 29.83 Great Plains 26
23 Rose-Hulman 29.29 HCAC 48
24 Ohio Wesleyan 29.08 NCAC 62
25 UMass Dartmouth 28.03 Little East NR
Men’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC 470.06 6
2 CCIW 225.58 1
3 NESCAC 206.95 2
4 IIAC 134.04 2
5 SUNYAC 105.12 1
6 NCAC 99.76 2
7 NEWMAC 88.16 2
8 MIAC 87.60 2
9 OAC 74.34
10 ASC 71.25 1

Women’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings

2012 Preseason — January 11

next ranking: January 25
Rank School Points Conference 2011 FINAL
1 Wartburg 187.22 IIAC 2
2 Williams 123.68 NESCAC 7
3 UW-Oshkosh 122.96 WIAC 1
4 Illinois Wesleyan 86.88 CCIW 6
5 MIT 78.69 NEWMAC 3
6 Methodist 76.04 USA South 4
7 Monmouth (Ill.) 70.16 Midwest 10
8 Middlebury 67.28 NESCAC 19
9 Illinois College 65.80 Midwest 5
10 Ramapo 58.61 NJAC 43
11 Wheaton (Mass.) 50.57 NEWMAC 11
12 UW-Whitewater 49.89 WIAC 24
13 Wellesley 49.01 NEWMAC 11
14 North Central (Ill.) 47.08 CCIW 17
15 UW-Eau Claire 46.25 WIAC 33
16 Ithaca 41.31 Empire 8 19
17 Coe 41.24 IIAC 14
18 Tufts 41.20 NESCAC 48
19 Washington (Mo.) 39.17 UAA 27
20 Moravian 38.26 Landmark 11
21 Buffalo State 35.61 SUNYAC 19
22 SUNY Oneonta 32.79 SUNYAC 39
23 Rowan 31.82 NJAC 55
24 Keene State 31.48 Little East 14
25 Amherst 30.10 NESCAC 55
Women’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference
Points
Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC
310.57
3
2 NESCAC
285.33
4
3 IIAC
272.50
2
4 NEWMAC
193.06
3
5 Midwest Conference
167.67
2
6 CCIW
156.16
2
7 NJAC
134.47
2
8 USA South
102.48
1
9 SUNYAC
90.46
2
10 UAA
87.89
1

 

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