Several teams made big moves up relative to the psych sheet were made on the first day of the 2015 Women’s NCAA Championships. Georgia, Stanford, Texas A&M, Louisville, Arizona, North Carolina, and Kentucky all made improvements from their predicted, even if some of those improvements came from diving. Arizona picked up 20 from diving and Stanford and Kentucky each picked up 17.
California is still close to their predicted score after the first day of the meet. They are only 1 point below their seeded scoring with 163 points on the day.
Georgia coach Jack Baurle mentioned this about his team’s performance today:
“We were really particularly happy with the 500s, and we had two young ladies that really didn’t do much at all last year – Hali Flickinger didn’t even swim in the event, she swam in the 200 IM and did not score. That was pretty neat. And then Jordan [Mattern], she hadn’t swum that the last two years, and that was a 4:36.
The three IM-ers did a job. They were not seeded to score in the top 16 so we were happy about that this morning. I think Annie [Zhu] ran out of a little gas today, she had three 200 IMs today and the relays.
Just a job well done. Cal’s a great team, Stanford’s a great team. Heck, there are a lot of great teams here. I’m proud of our 50 ladies too.
This meet’s always won in the mornings, I think. We have to have another good one, and see if we can put a little pressure on because Cal is certainly a great team and is supposed to score a heck of a lot of points tomorrow so it’s going to be hard to even be close.”
Scoring Predictions Analysis by Price Fishback
|
Rank |
TEAM |
Thursday Actual |
Thursday Psych |
Thu Actual minus Psych |
Friday Psych |
Saturday Pscyh |
Final Psych |
Final Thu Final Fri Sat Psych |
|
1 |
cal |
162 |
163 |
-1 |
206 |
136 |
505 |
504 |
|
2 |
ga |
172 |
116 |
56 |
110 |
143 |
369 |
425 |
|
3 |
st |
111 |
88 |
23 |
140 |
82 |
310 |
333 |
|
4 |
va |
76 |
121 |
-45 |
109 |
64 |
294 |
249 |
|
5 |
tam |
82.5 |
59 |
23.5 |
89 |
72 |
220 |
243.5 |
|
6 |
lou |
76 |
42 |
34 |
73 |
45 |
160 |
194 |
|
7 |
socal |
46 |
44 |
2 |
78 |
39 |
161 |
163 |
|
8 |
fl |
27 |
63 |
-36 |
57 |
74 |
194 |
158 |
|
9 |
tn |
52 |
46 |
6 |
59 |
25 |
130 |
136 |
|
10 |
wi |
54 |
57 |
-3 |
27 |
45 |
129 |
126 |
|
11 |
in |
7 |
18 |
-11 |
64 |
41 |
123 |
112 |
|
12 |
tx |
42 |
35 |
7 |
34 |
30 |
99 |
106 |
|
13 |
az |
44 |
5 |
39 |
20 |
37 |
62 |
101 |
|
14 |
mn |
19 |
19 |
0 |
41 |
22 |
82 |
82 |
|
15 |
mi |
3 |
23 |
-20 |
34 |
41 |
98 |
78 |
|
16 |
ky |
21 |
0 |
21 |
16 |
34 |
50 |
71 |
|
17 |
au |
32 |
30 |
2 |
22 |
15 |
67 |
69 |
|
18 |
ncst |
41 |
37 |
4 |
2 |
24 |
63 |
67 |
|
19 |
nc |
32 |
0 |
32 |
26 |
0 |
26 |
58 |
|
20 |
mo |
30 |
20 |
10 |
24 |
0 |
44 |
54 |
|
21 |
nd |
24 |
5 |
19 |
14 |
15 |
34 |
53 |
|
22 |
fsu |
11 |
2 |
9 |
7 |
17 |
26 |
35 |
|
23 |
al |
0 |
8 |
-8 |
17 |
14 |
39 |
31 |
|
24 |
ucla |
0 |
7 |
-7 |
17 |
12 |
36 |
29 |
|
25 |
psu |
19 |
24 |
-5 |
7 |
0 |
31 |
26 |
|
26 |
pu |
14 |
0 |
14 |
12 |
0 |
12 |
26 |
|
27 |
smu |
8 |
12 |
-4 |
12 |
0 |
24 |
20 |
|
28 |
sds |
4 |
31 |
-27 |
2 |
13 |
46 |
19 |
|
29 |
fgc |
4.5 |
5 |
-0.5 |
13 |
0 |
18 |
17.5 |
|
30 |
nev |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
12 |
17 |
17 |
|
31 |
vt |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
15 |
16 |
16 |
|
32 |
den |
0 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
4 |
15 |
15 |
|
33 |
rice |
0 |
0 |
0 |
14 |
0 |
14 |
14 |
|
34 |
ilst |
12 |
0 |
12 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
12 |
|
35 |
ka |
0 |
0 |
0 |
11 |
0 |
11 |
11 |
|
36 |
io |
4 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
9 |
|
37 |
lsu |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8 |
0 |
8 |
8 |
|
38 |
ohst |
2 |
0 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
6 |
8 |
|
39 |
mioh |
7 |
0 |
7 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
7 |
|
40 |
orst |
0 |
3 |
-3 |
0 |
7 |
10 |
7 |
|
41 |
mifl |
6 |
0 |
6 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
|
42 |
ark |
0 |
2 |
-2 |
4 |
1 |
7 |
5 |
|
43 |
cin |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
4 |
4 |
|
44 |
ha |
3 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
|
45 |
flgc |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
46 |
il |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Yeah, Georgia’s strategy is clearly to get as many girls as they can into the finals in the morning. It worked for them…to an extent. I agree, 10 points is not enough and they had a much weaker finals session than their prelims. Still, many thought Cal would be ahead, or even be ahead by a comfortable margin even on day one, and they’re not. I still think Cal will win the whole shebang, and I don’t think Georgia will have any superstar performances a la Missy or Simone but I’m glad Georgia’s depth is going to make the team race tighter and more interesting.
ADAF… great insight… “Georgia’s strategy is clearly to get as many girls as they can into the finals in the morning”… how else do you figure a team scores points?
Georgia had a great prelims and a less than great finals… they didn’t do enough. A 10 point buffer won’t be sufficient.
And while I’m usually neutral about all these college swimming battles and while I have nothing against Georgia and even if I’m a huge Simone Manuel fan, I must admit that I would be very happy to see Missy win a team title with Cal for her last college season.
Funny.
I thought that Georgia had an awful first day with a lot of bad performances but I read they had a good first day.
Yes, they are first. 🙂
This meet’s not over yet. Tomorrow’s prelims may end up deciding the meet. GA is expected to be only 3rd in point total for Friday alone, but based on what happened today, if they have a big morning tomorrow like they did today, and then do even a little better than expected on Sunday, with some diving points thrown in, and Cal doesn’t take advantage of all of their opportunities, then the Dawgs could still take it all.
Temporary georgia fan just because nothing makes me happier than watching the plethora of cal fans on this site eat their words.
i mean seriously they just got killed