USTFCCCA Polls & Rankings
DI Rankings: Texas A&M, LSU Are Ranked No. 1 Heading to Des Moines
NEW ORLEANS – The NCAA Division I Outdoor Track & Field Championships will continue next weekend, June 6-9 in Des Moines, Iowa, with 24 left standing in each event, entered as a result of performances from preliminary rounds held this past weekend. The latest USTFCCCA National Team Rankings are based on these entries and show the top teams in the country, Texas A&M’s men and LSU’s women, are still No. 1 after the championships’ opening weekend. LSU’s men moved to No. 2 in the rankings from No. 4 while Arizona’s men jumped three spots to No. 6. Kansas’ women remain No. 2 while indoor national champions Oregon climbed two spots to No. 3.
[All rankings corrected from intial release. Rankings corrected 5/29 3:30pm CT]
National Championship Central
NCAA Final Round Entries: MEN | WOMEN
Final Round Championship Entries: Leaders by Team | Leaders by Conference
National Ranking PDFs: Top 25 | Full by Team | Event-by-Event | Week-by-Week
Previous Rankings
USTFCCCA NCAA Division I |
|||||
Men’s Outdoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings (Top 25) |
|||||
2012 Week #9 — May 29 (Pre-NCAA Finals) [corrected 5/29, 3:30pm CT] |
|||||
| next ranking: FINAL, NCAA Championship results | |||||
| Rank | School | Points | Conference | Head Coach (Yr) | Last Week |
| 1 | Texas A&M | 284.76 | Big 12 | Pat Henry (8th) | 1 |
| 2 | LSU | 222.51 | SEC | Dennis Shaver (8th) | 4 |
| 3 | Arizona | 220.20 | Pac-12 | Fred Harvey (10th) | 6 |
| 4 | Texas | 219.50 | Big 12 | Bubba Thornton (17th) | 5 |
| 5 | Florida State | 209.96 | ACC | Bob Braman (9th) | 7 |
| 6 | Florida | 204.69 | SEC | Mike Holloway (10th) | 2 |
| 7 | Indiana | 194.06 | Big Ten | Ron Helmer (5th) | 3 |
| 8 | Virginia Tech | 178.65 | ACC | Dave Cianelli (11th) | 16 |
| 9 | Southern California | 165.52 | Pac-12 | Ron Allice (18th) | 13 |
| 10 | Auburn | 163.34 | SEC | Ralph Spry (15th) | 12 |
| 11 | Texas Tech | 161.66 | Big 12 | Wes Kittley (13th) | 9 |
| 12 | Arkansas | 156.37 | SEC | Chris Bucknam (4th) | 8 |
| 13 | Nebraska | 152.27 | Big Ten | Gary Pepin (29th) | 10 |
| 14 | Mississippi | 146.39 | SEC | Joe Walker (28th) | 11 |
| 15 | Oregon | 133.19 | Pac-12 | Vin Lananna (7th) | 21 |
| 16 | Stanford | 126.54 | Pac-12 | Edrick Floreal (7th) | 18 |
| 17 | Arizona State | 121.61 | Pac-12 | Greg Kraft (16th) | 14 |
| 18 | Penn State | 115.81 | Big Ten | Beth Alford-Sullivan (6th) | 19 |
| 19 | Ohio State | 104.82 | Big Ten | Ed Beathea (1st) | 25 |
| 20 | Kansas | 104.30 | Big 12 | Stanley Redwine (12th) | 20 |
| 21 | Georgia | 101.45 | SEC | Wayne Norton (13th) | 27 |
| 22 | Minnesota | 100.78 | Big Ten | Steve Plasencia (4th) | 26 |
| 23 | Wisconsin | 99.17 | Big Ten | Ed Nuttycombe (28th) | 15 |
| 24 | UCLA | 95.73 | Pac-12 | Mike Maynard (3rd) | 28 |
| 25 | Oklahoma | 93.62 | Big 12 | Martin Smith (7th) | 22 |
| Dropped out: No. 17 Mississippi State, No. 23 Iowa, No. 24 Baylor | |||||
| Men’s Conference Index Top 10 | |||
| Rank | Conference | Points | Top 25 Teams |
| 1 | SEC | 1220.75 | 6 |
| 2 | Big 12 | 1118.74 | 5 |
| 3 | Big Ten | 990.05 | 6 |
| 4 | Pac-12 | 954.19 | 6 |
| 5 | ACC | 617.52 | 2 |
| 6 | Ivy | 186.03 | |
| 7 | Big East | 163.12 | |
| 8 | Missouri Valley | 155.00 | |
| 9 | Mountain West | 117.96 | |
| 10 | Summit League | 110.99 | |
USTFCCCA NCAA Division I |
|||||
Women’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings (Top 25) |
|||||
2012 Week #9 — May 29 (Pre-NCAA Finals) [corrected 5/29, 3:30pm CT] |
|||||
| next ranking: FINAL, NCAA Championship results | |||||
| Rank | School | Points | Conference | Head Coach (Yr) | Last Week |
| 1 | LSU | 349.89 | SEC | Dennis Shaver (8th) | 1 |
| 2 | Kansas | 276.72 | Big 12 | Stanley Redwine (12th) | 2 |
| 3 | Oregon | 239.80 | Pac-12 | Vin Lananna (7th) | 5 |
| 4 | Texas A&M | 232.32 | Big 12 | Pat Henry (8th) | 6 |
| 5 | Clemson | 225.74 | ACC | Lawrence Johnson (4th) | 3 |
| 6 | Texas | 205.21 | Big 12 | Bev Kearney (20th) | 4 |
| 7 | Stanford | 181.28 | Pac-12 | Edrick Floreal (7th) | 10 |
| 8 | Florida | 175.25 | SEC | Mike Holloway (5th) | 7 |
| 9 | Oklahoma | 142.20 | Big 12 | Martin Smith (7th) | 16 |
| 10 | Arizona | 141.65 | Pac-12 | Fred Harvey (10th) | 8 |
| 11 | Tennessee | 137.86 | SEC | J.J. Clark (11th) | 9 |
| 12 | Arkansas | 135.96 | SEC | Lance Harter (22nd) | 13 |
| 13 | UCF | 135.89 | Conference USA | Caryl Smith Gilbert (5th) | 14 |
| 14 | Southern California | 131.28 | Pac-12 | Ron Allice (18th) | 23 |
| 15 | Southern Illinois | 117.53 | Missouri Valley | Connie Price-Smith (11th) | 18 |
| 16 | Arizona State | 114.91 | Pac-12 | Greg Kraft (16th) | 12 |
| 17 | Florida State | 113.61 | ACC | Bob Braman (9th) | 24 |
| 18 | Georgia | 99.83 | SEC | Wayne Norton (13th) | 20 |
| 19 | Ohio State | 97.45 | Big Ten | Karen Dennis (6th) | 22 |
| 20 | Louisville | 97.28 | Big East | Ron Mann (8th) | 15 |
| 21 | Illinois State | 90.79 | Missouri Valley | Elvis Forde (9th) | 17 |
| 22 | Texas Tech | 85.59 | Big 12 | Wes Kittley (13th) | 11 |
| 23 | Southern Miss | 81.46 | Conference USA | Kevin Stephen (5th) | 26 |
| 24 | San Diego State | 80.11 | Mountain West | Shelia Burrell (3rd) | 37 |
| 25 | TCU | 79.81 | Mountain West | Darryl Anderson (8th) | 30 |
| Dropped out: No. 19 Illinois, No. 21 Baylor, No. 25 Iowa State | |||||
| Women’s Conference Index Top 10 | |||
| Rank | Conference | Points | Top 25 Teams |
| 1 | Big 12 | 1242.04 | 5 |
| 2 | Pac-12 | 1085.71 | 5 |
| 3 | SEC | 1057.89 | 5 |
| 4 | ACC | 581.16 | 2 |
| 5 | Big East | 499.91 | 1 |
| 6 | Big Ten | 465.34 | 1 |
| 7 | Conference USA | 328.52 | 2 |
| 8 | Missouri Valley | 318.19 | 2 |
| 9 | Mountain West | 236.25 | 2 |
| 10 | Ivy | 107.09 | |
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.
