Women's Division II
TeamRecordPower RatingsPR Rank
Georgian Court6-711-50.226   66.7771.547.74291811
New Haven7-1014-30.412   72.4074.294.5820911
Millersville6-108-70.158   69.0372.225.94251510
East Stroudsburg4-1111-70.344   65.2069.777.3632239
Bloomsburg9-89-9-0.029   71.5571.892.5522175
S. New Hampshire10-412-5-0.008   74.1774.152.3115105
Mercyhurst7-512-30.217   74.9576.574.451284
Limestone14-417-10.167   79.0280.234.27844
Molloy5-99-70.205   72.6572.091.5119163
Adelphi13-216-10.075   80.9982.354.63532
Notre Dame (OH)3-22-3-0.200   68.1067.671.2928262
Philadelphia8-412-50.039   73.5572.400.8416142
West Chester19-220-10.048   82.9684.905.53211
Belmont Abbey8-1012-70.187   74.5473.380.9113121
Wilmington4-46-60.000   62.6962.250.8233321
Seton Hill1-123-110.137   56.6159.254.2038380
Lees-McRae1-130-15-0.071   60.0960.842.103435-1
Assumption0-142-120.143   59.8660.031.353637-1
C.W. Post17-016-2-0.111   84.9083.000.8412-1
St. Thomas Aquinas4-82-11-0.179   65.4864.380.223031-1
Gannon10-410-30.055   80.3576.68-1.7867-1
Franklin Pierce1-112-110.071   59.0858.940.903739-2
Shippensburg8-104-13-0.209   69.8268.24-0.022325-2
Stonehill18-214-3-0.076   82.0378.61-1.3235-2
Lock Haven16-415-4-0.011   81.9577.84-2.2046-2
Dominican0-60-100.000   48.0053.076.544043-3
Slippery Rock0-150-170.000   51.3353.312.923942-3
St. Andrews4-105-120.008   69.1867.56-0.122427-3
Saint Michael's6-89-70.134   72.0669.24-1.402124-3
Southern Connecticut3-103-12-0.031   65.4261.42-3.453134-3
Bryant8-610-70.017   74.4171.30-1.571419-5
Pfeiffer15-38-8-0.333   79.2372.74-5.43713-6
American International2-110-14-0.154   59.8654.39-5.773541-6
Indiana (PA)6-103-14-0.199   68.3361.78-6.422733-6
Queens10-711-70.023   75.8371.24-3.321120-9
Saint Anselm6-75-10-0.128   73.1866.84-5.751828-10
Bentley11-57-10-0.276   75.8771.06-3.591021-11
Regis (CO)3-51-8-0.264   73.2366.62-6.091729-12
Merrimack10-67-6-0.087   76.3070.62-4.65922-13


  • Only teams that played in both years are included.  However, power rating (PR) ranks were not altered to account for the deletions (which were few).

  • Teams with the same PR on ratings pages may have different PR ranks here (e.g., if teams A and B both have a PR of 84.50 and ratings-page ranks of 27 and 28, respectively, their ranks may be reversed on this page, as ordering in the case of ties is arbitary).

  • Teams are shown in descending order by change in PR rank and then by change in PR.

  • Power rating change accounts for differences in the mean PR and the standard deviation between the two years and cannot be derived by subtraction.

  • Greater change is naturally possible -- and in fact probable -- in the divisions having more teams.

  • If they change, teams ranked near the extremes last year obviously have only one way to go; they can also change the most.
Create a free lacrosse website