RunnerspaceNewsView

DIII Indoor TF Rankings — Week #6, February 29 - USTFCCCA

Published by Coach Matt
Feb 29 2012, 03:13 PM | 419 views
PrintReport
Social
Images

DIII Indoor T&F Rankings — Week #6, February 29

Courtesy: Tom Lewis, USTFCCCA

February 29, 2012   

QUICKLY … The biggest turn this season to the NCAA Division III indoor track & field national team rankings has occurred this week. On the men’s side, UW-La Crosse has taken over the No. 1 spot for the first time this year. Prior, they had been ranked No. 2 or 3 throughout the season. In addition, UW-Oshkosh jumped to No. 2 while two-time defending champion North Central slipped to a close No. 3. In the men’s rankings, the WIAC occupies five of the top six spots. On the women’s side, Wartburg has retained their No. 1 ranking. No. 2 UW-Oshkosh is the only other team in the same stratosphere as the Knights.

Next week’s rankings — released on Monday — will be scored only with marks from those who declare and are accepted into the NCAA Championships.

National Ranking PDFs: Top 25 | Full by Team | Event-by-Event | Week-by-Week
Regional Index PDFs: Top Ten by Region | Full by Team | Event-by-Event
Collegiate-Leading Marks | Best Marks by Football Players
Previous Rankings

National Championships Central

 

USTFCCCA NCAA Division III

Men’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings (Top 25)

2012 Week #6 — February 29

next ranking: MONDAY, March 5 (pre-NCAA)

Rank School Points Conference Head Coach (Yr) Last Week
1 UW-La Crosse 141.46 WIAC Josh Buchholtz (4th) 2
2 UW-Oshkosh 136.53 WIAC Paul Brown (2nd) 3
3 North Central (Ill.) 130.31 CCIW Frank Gramarosso (2nd) 1
4 UW-Eau Claire 86.03 WIAC Chip Schneider (10th) 7
5 UW-Stout 84.95 WIAC Laura Knudsen (4th) 10
6 UW-Whitewater 79.82 WIAC Mike Johnson (3rd) 4
7 MIT 67.54 NEWMAC Halston Taylor (22nd) 15
8 Amherst 63.19 NESCAC Ned Nedeau (15th) 12
9 UW-Platteville 59.77 WIAC Jim Nickasch (11th) 11
10 McMurry 58.19 ASC Barbara Crousen (14th) 6
11 Wabash 57.74 NCAC Clyde Morgan (4th) 9
12 Nebraska Wesleyan 57.15 Great Plains Ted Bulling (27th) 8
13 St. Thomas (Minn.) 55.35 MIAC Steve Mathre (17th) 5
14 SUNY Geneseo 46.47 SUNYAC Dave Prevosti (8th) 13
15 UW-Stevens Point 44.38 WIAC Rick Witt (33rd) 25
16 Middlebury 42.12 NESCAC Martin Beatty (24th) 23
17 Bates 40.82 NESCAC Al Fereshetian (17th) 14
18 Tufts 38.08 NESCAC Ethan Barron (7th) 43
19 Wartburg 37.67 IIAC Marcus Newsom (14th) 22
20 Baldwin-Wallace 37.08 OAC Bill Taraschke (27th) 17
21 Methodist 36.46 USA South Duane Ross (5th) 16
22 Christopher Newport 34.94 USA South Tyler Wingard (6th) 18
23 Haverford 34.02 Centennial Tom Donnelly (37th) 19
24 UMass Dartmouth 32.34 Little East Steve Gardiner (4th) 20
25 Bowdoin 30.27 NESCAC Peter Slovenski (26th) 27
dropped out: No. 22 UW-River Falls, No. 23 Springfield (Mass.)

 

Men’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC 660.26 7
2 NESCAC 279.56 5
3 CCIW 157.54 1
4 OAC 112.77 1
5 NEWMAC 97.88 1
6 SUNYAC 95.55 1
7 NCAC 89.02 1
8 MIAC 88.71 1
9 UAA 78.26
10 USA South 71.40 2

 

USTFCCCA NCAA Division III

Women’s Indoor Track & Field National Team Computer Rankings (Top 25)

2012 Week #6 — February 29

next ranking: MONDAY, March 5 (pre-NCAA)

Rank School Points Conference Head Coach (Yr) Last Week
1 Wartburg 254.78 IIAC Marcus Newsom (14th) 1
2 UW-Oshkosh 161.39 WIAC Pat Ebel (3rd) 2
3 MIT 94.87 NEWMAC Halston Taylor (5th) 4
4 Williams 88.92 NESCAC Fletcher Brooks (4th) 3
5 Washington (Mo.) 75.27 UAA Jeff Stiles (11th) 5
6 Illinois Wesleyan 64.93 CCIW Chris Schumacher (15th) 11
7 Buffalo State 61.29 SUNYAC Eugene Lewis (12th) 10
8 Middlebury 59.10 NESCAC Martin Beatty (24th) 6
9 Illinois College 57.25 Midwest Conference Mike Brooks (11th) 13
10 UW-Eau Claire 53.46 WIAC Chip Schneider (6th) 27
11 Methodist 53.42 USA South Duane Ross (5th) 8
12 Ithaca 52.40 Empire 8 Jennifer Potter (9th) 7
13 Ramapo 48.46 NJAC Mike Jackson (8th) 15
14 Monmouth (Ill.) 43.73 Midwest Conference Roger Haynes (12th) 14
15 Lehman 42.55 CUNYAC Lesleigh Hogg (16th) 12
16 UW-Whitewater 40.56 WIAC Mike Johnson (1st) 9
17 Tufts 35.11 NESCAC Kristen Morwick (12th) 21
18 Marietta 33.60 OAC (0th) 26
19 SUNY Oneonta 32.94 SUNYAC Matt LoPiccolo (8th) 16
20 Franklin & Marshall 31.73 Centennial Carl Schnabel (9th) 20
21 Bowdoin 30.89 NESCAC Peter Slovenski (26th) 22
22 Emory 30.63 UAA John Curtin (27th) 61
23 Nebraska Wesleyan 30.19 Great Plains Ted Bulling (25th) 18
24 Wheaton (Mass.) 29.78 NEWMAC Dave Cusano (1st) 19
25 Coe 25.39 IIAC Michael Warta (5th) 23
dropped out: No. 17 UW-La Crosse, No. 24 Mount Union, No. 25 Linfield

 

Women’s Conference Index Top 10
Rank Conference Points Top 25 Teams
1 WIAC 335.65 3
2 IIAC 303.20 2
3 NESCAC 256.62 4
4 NEWMAC 164.75 2
5 UAA 156.19 2
6 CCIW 129.21 1
7 SUNYAC 114.79 2
8 Midwest Conference 110.67 2
9 OAC 90.98 1
10 NJAC 61.99 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.

Read the full article at http://www.ustfccca.org/2012/02/featured/diii-indoor-tf-rankings-we...


Post to:  
Post as: 
 
 
Switch to Full Version