USA Ultimate Releases Second Edition of 2016 College Rankings

Posted: March 16, 2016 03:55 PM

Colorado Springs, Colo. (March 16, 2016) – USA Ultimate, the national governing body for the sport of ultimate in the United States and member of the U.S. Olympic Committee, released today the second set of official rankings for the 2016 college season. 

After a quiet tournament weekend in Division I, Wisconsin and Central Florida remain in the division's top men's and women's spots, respectively. 

The lone move in the men's top 10 was a Northwest Region switch of Victoria and British Columbia for the 10th overall spot. In women's D-I, the top 10 saw two switches - Whitman and British Columbia traded the second and third spots, while Texas and Pittsburgh traded ninth and tenth.

In Division III, John Brown remains number one in the men’s division. Bowdoin jumped from number 10 to take over the top spot in women's D-III, the division that saw the most movement in the second set of rankings. Last week's number one, Truman State, dropped one spot to number two. 

Davidson joined the top 10 in men's D-III, giving the Atlantic Coast three top-10 teams this week. And in D-III women's, it was a big week for the Ohio Valley, with the addition of two teams to the top 10: (3) Haverford and (6) Messiah. 

With one of the biggest tournament weekends of the year on the calendar for this weekend, including College Easterns and College Women's Centex, expect much more movement in the week three rankings which will be released next Wednesday. 

The college rankings are run each week, beginning in March, in the lead up to the division’s postseason. The rankings use data from games between rostered college teams at USA Ultimate sanctioned events that occur during the regular season, which runs January 2 to April 3, 2016. Teams must have competed in five regular-season games to be included in this week’s rankings. The threshold for inclusion will increase to 10 games by the time the final regular-season rankings are run.

The rankings are used to determine regional bid allocations to the Division I and Division III College Championships, which are set to be held May 21-22 and May 27-30 in Winston-Salem, N.C., and Raleigh, N.C., respectively.

The 2016 postseason begins the weekend of April 16-17, when the first conference championship events will be held around the country. 

Each of the nation’s 10 regions is guaranteed one automatic bid to the College Championships, with the remaining 10 bids being allocated to the regions whose teams finish highest in the final regular season rankings. Rankings also determine strength bid allocations from conference championships to regional championships. 

Additional information on the bid allocation process is available in the college season guidelines. The algorithm used to determine the rankings is version 2.0 of the USA Ultimate rankings algorithm. An explanation of the algorithm can be found on the main rankings page

Division I Rankings – March 16, 2016
Full Rankings

Men's Division

1. Wisconsin - NC
2. Massachusetts - NE
3. Stanford - SW
4. North Carolina-Wilmington - AC
5. Oregon - NW
6. Florida - SE
7. Minnesota - NC
8. Pittsburgh - OV
9. Washington - NW
10. British Columbia - NW

Women's Division

1. Central Florida - SE
2.  Whitman - NW
3. British Columbia - NW
4. Stanford - SW
5. Oregon - NW
6. Washington - NW
7. UCLA - SW
8. Minnesota - NC
9. Texas - SC
Pittsburgh - OV

Division III Rankings – March 16, 2016
Full Rankings

Men's Division

1. John Brown - SC
2. Whitman - NW
3. North Carolina-Asheville - AC
4. Williams - NE
5. Indiana Wesleyan - GL
6. Wheaton (Illinois) - GL
7. St. John's - NC
8. Davidson - AC
9. Claremont - SW
10. Richmond - AC

Women's Division

1. Bowdoin - NE 
2. Truman State - SC
3. Haverford - OV 
4. Puget Sound - NW 
5. Rice - SC 
6. Messiah - OV
7. St. Olaf - NC
8. Carleton College-Eclipse - NC
9. Lehigh - OV
10. Claremont - SW



Have any questions or comments? We welcome community feedback and discussion made in a respectful manner. Please refrain from profanity or personal attacks, as such public comments negatively reflect on our sport and community.