Way Too Early Recruit Rankings: Boys High School Class Of 2026

We continue our traditional recruiting coverage with our “Way Too Early” ranks of the upcoming season’s high school junior class. Since top recruits have started giving their verbal commitments earlier and earlier, we’ve moved up our rankings to help give better context to big recruiting announcements.

Before we run over our traditional ranking methodology, we should head off a few counterarguments at the pass:

• Isn’t this too early to have a good read on talent? Aren’t 16-year-old kids still improving? Maybe. On the other hand, coaches are clearly finding roster spots for kids who verbally commit this early. And if we and our readership want to have the most accurate picture of how the recruiting season is playing out, it’ll be useful to have some sort of ranking – even one still very much in flux – to refer to as big-name swimmers commit.
• But recruiting ranks don’t matter. It’s the fast-dropping swimmers and diamonds in the rough that really have the biggest NCAA impact. Not true. There are always fast-rising swimmers who quickly develop into NCAA stars. But there are far less of them than there are elite high school prospects who become high-impact NCAA swimmers. We all love the Cinderella stories, the unranked recruits who flourish into dominators. But even those rags-to-riches stories aren’t as fleshed out if they don’t have a clearly defined setup. These ranks help show us who is most likely to become NCAA standouts… but also contextualize where the eventual breakout stars originally rated compared to peers. If you, your favorite swimmer or your son/daughter isn’t ranked, don’t get mad – see it as the starting point for your/their rise to stardom.
• How accurate can these be with two-plus years of development to go before any of these swimmers compete in the NCAA? Who knows? Predicting the future never has a 100% hit rate. For these ranks, we’re a little less concerned with actual NCAA scoring times than we are in our junior/senior ranks, and probably marginally more interested in “ceilings” – wide event ranges, versatility, etc. But as with any ranking, these are ultimately nothing more than a snapshot in time: what the top of this recruiting class looks like in the moment, with full admission that a lot of these ranks can and will change by the time they finish their senior years.

THE METHODOLOGY

Our goal in these rankings is to reflect what college coaches look for in recruits, based on many years of conversations and coverage.

We focus only on American-based athletes, simply because there is so much uncertainty with international recruits – if they come to the United States, when they’ll come to the States and with what graduating class they should be ranked. Projecting international recruits often becomes more of a discussion of when they’ll first join a college program and not which program they’ll join.

A few other factors that weigh heavily in our rankings:

• Relay Value – Relay points count double in college swimming, and any program needs a strong stable of quality sprinters to fill out all 5 relays with stars. Obviously, a special distance swimmer can easily rank ahead of a very good 100 freestyler, but college swimming generally values a sprint freestyler over a distance swimmer, all other factors being equal.
• Improvements – Actual times carry the most weight by a long shot. But we also keep an eye on a swimmer’s trajectory, especially in deciding between two swimmers with relatively even times.
• Short Course over Long Course – while every club and every swimmer will have a different balance of focus between short course and long course swimming, the NCAA competes in short course yards, and that’s going to be the main factor considered in these rankings. Long course times are another data point for consideration, but we mainly view them through the lens of what a big long course swim could mean for an athlete’s future in short course.
• NCAA scoring ability – NCAAs are the big show for college teams, so we’ve weighted NCAA scoring potential very highly. Swimmers who already have NCAA scoring times wind up mostly filling out the top our of rankings. Since college athletic directors – and by extension coaches – also place high value on conference championships, scoring ability at conference meets is also a factor in our rankings.
• Relative depth in the NCAA and recruiting class – a wealth of elite depth nationwide in one stroke or discipline makes a big difference in what times are considered more valuable in that event. Events rise at different rates in the NCAA, but when one event gets extremely deep and fast at the college level, it makes high school prospects in those events a little less valuable, relatively, with lots of other veteran options. In the same way, a recruiting class stacked with swimmers in butterfly, for example, would make each butterflier a little less sought-after in the market, with lots of other recruiting options able to provide similar production.

Of course, there’s no way to predict the future, and the most concrete data we have to go on are cold, hard times. These rankings in no way mean that all of these 20 swimmers will be NCAA standouts, and they certainly don’t mean that no swimmer left off this list will make big contributions at the NCAA level.

THIS CLASS

• Depth primarily in freestyle, 200 fly
• Weaknesses in backstroke, IM, and the 200 breast
• Top two swimmers way above the rest

After two years of ranking prodigies who have made names for themselves at a young age such as Kaii Winkler, Daniel Diehl, Thomas Heilman, and Maximus Williamson, we shift to the class of 2026, which is a much more lower-profile class. However, that doesn’t mean it is void of stars.

Top-ranked swimmer Baylor Stanton has the fastest 200 back time we’ve ever seen from a high school sophomore, and yet it seems like he’s gone under the radar. However, he’s bound to make a name for himself soon, being extremely versatile and head-over-heels better than the rest of his classmates. Then theres the No. 2-ranked Gabriel Manteufel, the next distance phenom to come from the Sandpipers of Nevada. He’s already posting times capable of scoring at NCAAs, and is faster than his club teammate Luke Ellis (the fastest high schooler ever in the 1650 free) was as a sophomore.

However, the prominence of Stanton and Manteufel doesn’t hide how the class still has many weaknesses. Aside from Stanton, there are zero swimmers wh0 have broken 48 in the back, and only one swimmer who has broken 1:46. We were only able to place one swimmer in the “Best of the Rest” IM category. Louis Joos‘ 200 breast time is the slowest class-leading time in the event that we’ve seen since first ranking sophomores in 2018. That being said, there’s still plenty of depth in the sprint events and butterfly, which explains why so many of the top 20 swimmers swim free or fly.

But without further ado, let’s get started with these rankings.

TOP TIMES IN THE CLASS OF 2026

**The 1000 free isn’t an event at the Division I NCAA Championships, but is swum instead of the 1650 in many Division I dual meets and is part of the NCAA program in Division II.

With that out of the way, let’s get to our rankings.

Disclaimer: there are a lot of high school sophomores in the country, and no really good, complete, 100% accurate listing of them all. If you don’t see your favorite swimmer on the list, feel free to politely point them out in the comments. There’s a chance that we disagree with your assessment of their spot in the top 20, and so long as it’s done civilly, there’s no problem with differences of opinions. There’s also a chance that we’ve simply missed a no-brainer (we’ve taken every precaution to avoid that), and if that happens, we want to make sure we correct it.

BEST OF THE REST

Some additional names that came up in our research. For the purposes of space, we won’t include every top event for these athletes, but just a few of their standouts. Verbal commitments are listed where they’ve been reported. Each of these athletes is still an extremely high-level recruit:

Where noteworthy, long course best times included in italics.

Sprint Free:

• Miles Blackson-Dunbar (20.1/44.8)
• Finnegan Martin (20.2/44.9)
• Jason Sugihara (20.8/44.5)
• Timothy Lee (20.7/44.7/1:39.1, 1:49.7 2IM)
• Brody Engelstad (20.4/44.6)
• Nathan Foncu (44.7/1:37.9)

Distance Free:

• Grant Lilly (1:38.6/4:23.1)
• Alex Parent (4:28.6/15:14.3)
• Cooper Zakorchemny (4:28.9/15:24.11, 8:07/15:24)
• Ethan Linville (1:38.2/4:26.5)
• Lewis Zhang (1:38.8/4:26.7)
• Grayden Barker (1:39.3/4:25.0)

Backstroke:

• Wyatt Vitiello (1:46.1)
• Jack Chiappetta (49.5/1:46.3, 1:49.2 2FL)
• Chase Knopf (1:46.7)
• Liam Carrington (49.5/1:46.8)
• Luan Barnard (48.4)

Breaststroke:

• Elonzo Santos (54.7/2:01.3)
• Matt Vatev (54.8/2:00.3)
• Isaac Carsel (54.91/2:01.6)
• Remon Mann (55.0/1:59.7)
• Gerhardt Hoover (55.5/1:59.9, 1:49.3/3:55.4 IMs)

Butterfly:

• Ryan Quinn (48.3/1:48.6, 1:39.9 2FR)
• Austin Sorg (48.0)
• Nathan Carr (48.6/1:46.9)
• Caleb Kattau (48.9/1:49.1, 54.0/2:01.2)

IM:

• Alex Grocholski (3:54.68, 4:24.5 5FR)

Honorable Mentions

Whitaker Steward — Tsunami Swim Team of KC — Kearney High School — Liberty, MO

Best Times:

• 200 free: 1:39.11
• 500 free: 4:26.14
• 1000 free: 9:10.44
• 1650 free: 15:12.96
• 400 IM: 3:55.57

Steward stands out for having the second-fastest mile time in the class. It may pale in comparison to Manteufel’s time, but compared to other classes, that 15:12.96 is pretty impressive. It’s just two seconds off of Matt Marsteiner’s 15:10.71 that led the class of 2024 as sophomores, and also would have led the class of 2023.

The mile is by far Steward’s strongest event, but he has formidable times in the 500 free, 400 IM and 200 free as well. If he continues on his improvement trajectory, he will become a phenomenal distance swimmer.

Louis Joos — Bolles School Sharks — Bolles School — Jacksonville, FL

Best Times:

• 100 breast: 56.02
• 200 breast: 1:59.64 (best in class)

Joos is the class’s top 200 breaststroker in a very weak 200 breast class, but that’s enough for him to get an honorable mention. However, we didn’t put him in the top 20 because of the large disparity between his best 100 and 200 breast times.

This past season, Joos improved from a time of 2:04.93 to 1:59.64 in the 200 breast but didn’t see as big of an improvement in the 100, where he dropped from 57.27 to 56.02. If he can take a big leap in the 100 next season, he could easily be the top all-around breaststroker in the class.

Henry Lyness — Center Grove Aquatic Club — Center Grove High School — Greenwood, IN

Best Times:

• 100 back: 48.06
• 200 back: 1:48.21

In a class where only four swimmers have broken 49 seconds in the 100 back, Lyness stands out as the second-fastest in the event, as well as someone on the brink of going 47-point. In one season, he’s dropped over two seconds in the event, as his best time prior to this season was 50.49. He also had a near two-second drop in his 200 back, though he’s not as strong in that race as he is in the short-distance backstroke event. He’s only been as fast as 49.83 in the 100 fly, but his long course best of 55.74 indicates that he could be a bit faster in yards and pick the race up as a third event.

Brandon Ha — DART Swimming — Angelo Rodriguez — Fairfield, CA

Best Times:

• 100 fly: 48.07
• 200 fly: 1:46.75

Out of all the honorable mentions, Ha is the only one that really stands out in more than one event. He’s ranked sixth in the class for the 100 fly (and fourth through sixth are separated by 0.05 seconds) and 200 fly, making him one of the best all-around butterfliers. Fly is arguably the strongest stroke for this class so Ha does get the short end of the stick here a bit, but his ability to be good at both distances of the stroke is appreciated given that not many of his classmates are able to do that.

Top 20

20. Maxwell Stanislaus — Lakeside Aquatic Club (TX) — Keller High School — Keller, TX

Best Times:

• 200 free: 1:37.22
• 500 free: 4:24.95
• 200 fly: 1:47.63

Stanislaus is strong in both mid-distance freestyle and butterfly. He’s one of the faster 200 freestylers in the class, being ranked eighth overall and being just one out of nine swimmers to break the 1:38 barrier. He’s also ranked 11th in the 500 free and tenth in the 200 fly. While those are not high rankings compared to those of some of his classmates, the fact that he’s in the top eleven across three events and two strokes is impressive enough. This especially holds true in sophomore rankings, where versatility and potential matter more than specialization.

In addition, Stanislaus can be very promising in the 100 fly. His time of 49.02 isn’t all that, but he did clock a 54.60 long course time in May. If he can translate that over into yards, he could be a much better sprint flyer.

19. Lucas Young — Hurricane Aquatics – Immaculata LaSalle (Miami) — Key Biscayne, FL

Best Times:

• 100 breast: 54.93
• 200 breast: 1:59.92

Young is another strong two-distance stroke specialist. He’s one of just two swimmers in the class to go sub-55 in the 100 breast and sub-2:00 in the 200 breast, ranking third in his class for the former event and fourth in his class in the latter. In the 200 breast specifically, he had a major improvement from 2:07.61 to 1:59.92 in his sophomore season, and he also dropped over two seconds in his 100 breast. If he continues his trajectory, it will only help up his status in future class rankings.

18. Anthony Pineiro — Eagle Aquatics — G. Holmes Braddock Senior High School — Miami, FL

Best Times:

• 100 back: 48.24
• 200 back: 1:47.71
• 100 fly: 48.43

Piniero isn’t a top-ranked swimmer in any discipline, but he’s one of the few swimmers in this class to be strong in both backstroke and butterfly — making him a valuable relay asset. He’s the third-fastest swimmer in the class for the 100 back and 10th in the 100 fly, being the only swimmer not named Baylor Stanton or Rowan Cox to rank top ten for both events. His 200 back time is not ranked as high, but it doesn’t lag behind his 100 back time all that much.

Following in the footsteps of his club teammate Kaii Winkler, Piniero looks to be the next highly-ranked sprint recruit coming out of Eagle Aquatics.

17. Brody Chandler — Sierra Marlins Swim Team — Granite Bay High School — Roseville, CA

Best Times:

• 50 free: 20.58
• 100 free: 44.17
• 200 free: 1:38.89

Chandler is a strong three-distance sprinter, which allows him to be utilized on all sorts of relays. He stands out over the swimmers relegated to the “best of the rest” category for being capable of going sub-21/45/1:39 (being one of the few swimmers capable of doing so), and ranks as the the third-fastest 100 freestyler in the class. He also has tons of potential in his 200 free, having improved in the event the most compared to his other events. In one season, he dropped over seven seconds in the event, going from a best time of 1:45.91 to 1:38.89.

16. Liam Smith — Greater Kalamazoo Crocs — Ostego High School — Kalamazoo, MI

Best Times:

• 100 fly: 48.02
• 200 fly: 1:46.60
• 200 IM: 1:48.64

Smith is another strong all-around butterfier, ranking fifth in the class for both the 100 and 200 fly. He has basically identical times to Ha, but got the nod for the top 20 because he’s slightly faster in the butterfly events and also has the additional 200 IM asset. The 200 IM makes for a good third event for him to race on day one of NCAAs, and he’s also ranked fifth in the class for the event (though, given the context that this class is relatively weak in terms of IMers). As a top swimmer across three events, Smith is exactly the type of swimmer who will continue to rank higher if he improves throughout high school.

15. Aiden Hammer — King Aquatic Club — Gig Harbor High School — Fox Island, WA

Best Times:

• 200 free: 1:37.95
• 500 free: 4:23.24
• 1000 free: 9:06.92
• 1650 free: 15:16.15

Hammer excels as a mid-distance and distance swimmer, holding formidable best times across the 200, 500, and 1650 free. He’s one of 11 swimmers in the class to go under 1:38 in the 200 free, the fifth-fastest swimmer in the 500 free, and the fifth-fastest in the mile, With the exception of Stanton and Gabriel Manteufel, Hammer is the best swimmer in this class across the 200/500/1650 free distances. This gives him both relay value and the perfect NCAA lineup.

In addition, Hammer’s long course times are worth pointing out. He’s been as fast as 1:51.98 in the 200 free, 3:53.07 in the 400 free, and 8:01.23 in the 800 free, finishing as high as 15th at Olympic trials in the latter event. He will be competing at Junior Pan Pacs in the 800 free this summer.

14. Sam Wolf — Badger Aquatic Club — Middleton High School — Middleton, WI

Best Times:

• 50 free: 20.40
• 100 free: 44.80
• 200 free: 1:38.04
• 200 IM: 1:47.97
• 100 breast: 55.55

In a weak IM class, Wolf stands out as one of just three swimmers to go under the 1:48 barrier in the 200 IM. But in addition to that, he’s also a strong sprinter with sub-21/45/1:39 times. This complements his standout IM time, allowing him to be a relay asset as well. In addition, he also has a respectable 100 breast time that can be seen as a side event.

Wolf’s improvements in the 50 free and 200 IM were incremental this season, as he dropped less than half a second in both events. He had a normal drop in the 100 free from 46.02 to 44.80, and an over four-second improvement in the 200 free. It will be interesting to see if his rate of progression across his best events will change as he gets older.

13. JD Thumann — Sooner Swim Club — Norman High School — Norman, OK

Best Times:

• 50 free: 20.15
• 100 free: 45.21
• 100 fly: 47.86
• 200 fly: 1:47.34

Thumann stands out for being good at sprint freestyle and butterfly, being the only swimmer in this class to go under 20.2 in the 100 free and under 48 in either the 100 fly or 100 back. He ranks fourth in the class for the 50 free and 100 fly, as well as eighth in the 200 fly. The only event where he has more potential to improve in his the 100 free, which lags behind his 50 free. He dropped only 0.33 seconds in the 100 free this year, which is less than his 0.6-second drop in the 50 free (an event where it’s harder to drop time in). If he can experience a bigger leap in his 100 free next year, he can be an even more lethal sprint weapon than he is now.

12. Peter Vu — Irvine Novaquatics — Fountain Valley High School — Fountain Valley, CA

Best Times:

• 100 breast: 54.63
• 200 breast: 1:59.85
• 200 free: 1:38.50
• 500 free: 4:28.57

As the second-fastest swimmer in the class for both the 100 and 200 breast, Vu is by far the best all-breaststroker amongst his classmates (as both the top 100 and 200 breaststrokers are not as good at the other distance). His progression was tremendous in both events this past season, improving from 57.01 to 54.63 in the 100 breast and from 2:03.05 to 1:59.85 in the 200 breast. He also has strong mid-distance freestyle abilities, posting formidable times in the 200 and 500 free.

Vu’s profile is reminiscent of Noah Cakir, a standout breaststroker in the class of 2025 who also had mid-distance prowess (he went 54.7/1:59.4 in the breaststrokes and had a 4:28.9 500 free). However, Cakir was ranked in the “Best of the Rest” category as a sophomore, which is a testament to the differences between the depths of the two classes.

11. Santi Alzate — SwimMAC Carolina — Charlotte County Day School — Charlotte, NC

Best Times:

• 200 free: 1:38.02
• 500 free: 4:20.62
• 1650 free: 15:23.69
• 400 IM: 3:51.41

Alzate checks in as the third-fastest 500 freestyler in this class, and is just 0.09 seconds behind Stanton’s No. 2-ranked time. In addition, he’s also the third-fastest 400 IMer behind Stanton and Manteufel, the seventh-fastest in the class for the mile and the 12th-fastest in the 200 free. Being on the verge of breaking 4:20 in the 500 free is impressive enough as a sophomore, but being a top 400 IM just adds to his baggage as a versatile distance swimmer. On day two of NCAAs, he will be able to choose between being a pure freestyler and swimming the 200 free, or swimming the 400 IM.

Though Alzate had big drops in all his events, his 500 and 1650 free improvements were the most notable. He shed nearly eight seconds off his best in the former event, and 25 seconds in the latter.

10. Albert Smelzer — Greensboro Swimming Association — Page High School — Greensboro, NC

Best Times:

• 50 free: 19.96
• 100 free: 43.87
• 200 free: 1:38.15
• 100 fly: 48.89
• 100 back: 48.38

Smelzer is our first ranked swimmer to have a sub-19 50 and sub-43 100 free (only two of them are in this class), ranking third in the class for the former event and second for the latter event. With sprinters being by far the most valuable type of swimmer when it comes to ranking recruits, its only right that he ranks in the top ten. In addition, he also is nearing the 1:38 barrier in the 200 free, a race that will most likely be his third event. He could also swim the 100 fly or 100 back, being one of the six swimmers in this class to go under 49 seconds in the latter event. There’s no blatant weakness in his profile as a recruit, which will make him valuable from the jump.

9. Mike Rice — SwimMAC Carolina — Marvin Ridge High School — Waxhaw, NC

Best Times:

• 50 free: 19.79 (best in class)
• 100 free: 44.18
• 200 free: 1:37.13
• 100 fly: 48.49
• 200 IM: 1:48.10

Rice is the first swimmer in the top 20 to lead the class in an event, and he does so in the 50 free. It is an event where he had massive progression, improving from a best time of 21.09 to 19.79 in just a singular season — a massive drop for an event as short as 50 yards. Though the 50 free is his standout race, he’s good across several different distances and strokes, as he ranks fifth in the class for the 100 free, seventh for the 200 free, and fourth for the 200 IM. He also has a respectable time of 48.49 in the 100 fly.

8. Andrew Maksymowski — Irvine Novaquatics — Northwood High School — Irvine, CA

Best Times:

• 50 free: 20.83
• 100 free: 44.76
• 200 free: 1:35.61 (best in class)
• 500 free: 4:22.64
• 1650 free: 15:21.77

Not only is Maksymowski the only swimmer in this class to have gone under 1:36 seconds in the 200 free, but he’s also the fastest swimmer in the class for the event by a whopping 0.6 seconds. With this sort of dominance in the 200 free and the fourth-fastest 500 free time of the class, it’s fair to call him one of the best mid-distance swimmers in his year. Only Manteufel has an argument for being better than him (his 200 free time is 0.6 seconds slower than Makysymowski’s but he has a 500 free time that’s almost four seconds faster), and it’s still close between the two. In addition, Makysymowski has the sixth-fastest 1650 free time of the class and formidable 50 and 100 free times, allowing him to be a relay asset while swimming distance events individually.

7. Sam Marsteiner — New Wave Swim Team — Leesville Road High School —Raleigh, NC

Best Times:

• 200 fly: 1:45.29 (best in class)
• 100 fly: 49.26
• 1650 free: 15:16.91
• 500 free: 4:22.68
• 200 free: 1:38.98

Up next is another dominant 200-yard event swimmer — Marsteiner is the only swimmer in this class with a sub 1:46 200 fly, and he’s the fastest in this event by 0.77 seconds. He finished fifth in this race at winter juniors, and he and Stanton (who placed eighth) were the only two sophomores in the field. In addition, Marsteiner excels in the distance events, ranking fifth in his class for the 500 free and 1650 free.

Marsteiner’s older brother Matt was also a regular in these recruit rankings. He was ranked 18th in the class of 2024 (ranked 12th as a sophmore) re-ranks, and like Sam, he was also a distance swimmer.

6. Tim Wu — Pleasanton Seahawks — Dougherty Valley High School — San Ramon, CA

Best Times:

• 100 fly: 47.50
• 200 fly: 1:47.56
• 200 IM: 1:47.04
• 400 IM: 3:52.92
• 100 free: 44.23
• 200 free: 1:36.44
• 500 free: 4:24.09

All eyes are on the national age group-shattering Luka Mijatovic in the class of 2027, but his club teammate Wu is also a talented recruit. Though he doesn’t have a class-leading time, he’s a multi-event threat, being one of the top swimmers in his class in butterfly, freestyle, and IM. He’s the second-fastest swimmer in his class for the 200 IM by nearly a second and the second-fastest in the 100 fly, placing fourth and third respectively in the events at the CIF State Championships this year. In addition, he’s got the fourth-fastest time in the class for the 200 free, the third-fastest 400 IM, and is strong in other events like the 100 free, 500 free, and 200 fly. There are so many routes he can go on if he wants to specialize, as he’s good at several races. He’s the first uber-versatile swimmer we’ve mentioned that’s a standout across three disciplines, and has sky-high potential.

5. Micah Davis — Aquajets Swim Team — Tech High School — Clearwater, MN

Best Times:

• 100 fly: 46.94 (best in class)
• 200 fly: 1:46.38
• 200 free: 1:36.74

Davis is the fastest 100 flyer in this recruiting class by over half a second, and the only one to break 47 seconds. In addition, he’s also the third-fastest 200 flyer in the class, making him arguably the top all-around butterflier on this list. The 200 free fits as a great third event, with him being one of the handful of swimmers in the class to go 1:36 in the race. Considering that there are only two 46-point flyers or backstrokers in this class,

In the 200 free and 100 fly, Davis was a 2024 Minnesota Class AA State Champion, setting his best times in both events at the championship meet running from February 29 to March 2 this year.

4. Rowan Cox — Longhorn Aquatics — James Bowie High School — Austin, TX

Best Times:

• 100 fly: 47.51
• 200 fly: 1:46.41
• 50 free: 20.58
• 100 free: 44.15
• 200 free: 1:37.43
• 100 back: 48.07
• 200 back: 1:45.80

Like Wu, Cox is proficient across three disciplines, as he holds strong times in butterfly, freestyle, and backstroke. The biggest thing that put him over the rest of the swimmers with similar profiles as him was the 200 back, where he is one of two swimmers to go under the 1:46 barrier. However, his 100 fly, 200 fly, and 100 back (all ranked third in the class) and sprint freestyle times make him stand out as well. At NCAAs, he will have the choice between focusing on the 200 fly, 100 free and 200 back on day four, and then between the 100 fly and 100 fly on day three. This is a class that lacks a lot of multi event threats, so Cox being so strong in so many strokes and distances puts him over most of his classmates.

Notably, Cox will be swimming the 100 fly at Junior Pan Pacs this summer after he posted a standout time of 52.80 in the long course at Olympic trials. If that time translates into short course for him, it will be massive.

3. Austin Carpenter — Central Ohio Aquatics — St. Charles Preparatory School — Dublin, OH

Best Times:

• 50 free: 19.94
• 100 free: 43.83 (best in class)
• 200 free: 1:36.21
• 100 breast: 53.70 (best in class)
• 200 IM: 1:48.52

It’s rare to see a swimmer versatile enough to lead their class in both the 100 free and 100 breast, given how many breaststrokers are event specialists. But that’s the reality of Carpenter, who is the only swimmer in the class with a sub-54 100 breast time (and also the fastest swimmer in the class by nearly a second), and one of the two swimmers in the class with a sub-44 100 free time. In addition, he’s ranked second in the class for the 50 and 200 free, as well as fifth in the 200 IM. As the only swimmer who is a class leader in multiple sprint strokes, Carpenter is an extremely valuable recruit who can take multiple different routes in his career to succeed.

2. Gabriel Manteufel — Sandpipers of Nevada — Las Vegas, NV

Best Times:

• 1650 free: 14:41.11 (best in class)
• 1000 free: 8:51.54 (best in class)
• 500 free: 4:18.91 (best in class)
• 200 free: 1:36.64
• 200 IM: 1:49.90
• 400 IM: 3:51.11

There’s a very big gap between the top two recruits in this class and everyone else, and Mateufel’s resume proves why. His 1650 free time would have made the ‘A’ final at the 2024 NCAA Championships, and he’s the only swimmer in the class with an NCAA-scoring time as a sophomore. That time also ranks him second all-time amongst 15 and 16 year olds in the United States. In addition, Manteufel the class’s top swimmer in the 1000 and 500 free, being the only swimmer with a sub-4:20 500 free time. He’s ranked fifth in the class for the 200 free too, giving him some relay value. But that’s not all. Though Manteufel’s core strengths lie within the distance free events, he’s also a great IMer, with the second-fastest 400 Im in the class.

Manteufel notably finished second in the race where he set his 1650 free best time, losing only to his club teammate Luke Ellis — who went a 1650 free time that would have won at NCAAs this year. It’s worth noting that Manteufel is faster than Ellis was as a sophomore in the 200, 500 and 1650 free, so it will be very interesting to see where he ends up a year later.

1. Baylor Stanton — Gwinnett Aquatics — Brookwood High School — Lawrenceville, GA

Best Times:

• 200 back: 1:40.58 (best in class)
• 100 back: 46.57 (best in class)
• 200 IM: 1:44.04 (best in class)
• 400 IM: 3:45.39 (best in class)
• 50 free: 20.36
• 100 free: 44.57
• 200 free: 1:36.39
• 500 free: 4:20.53
• 1000 free: 9:05.98
• 1650 free: 15:13.99
• 100 fly: 48.04
• 200 fly: 1:46.06

It was very tempting to rank Manteufel at the No. 1 spot, but Stanton’s versatility, dominance across multiple events and relay value gave him the nod to be put at the top. He is the 15-16 U.S. national age group record holder in the 200 back, with a time that would have qualified him for the 2024 NCAA Championships. That time also makes him the fastest 200 backstroker in the class by over five seconds. He’s also the fastest 100 backstroker in the class by 1.49 seconds, the fastest 200 IMer by three seconds, and the fastest 400 IMer by over six seconds. Given how dominant he is, its clear that he’s way ahead of the game compared to people his age.

But that’s not all. In addition to his backstroke and IM dominance, Stanton is also strong from the 50 to the 1650 free, as well as the butterfly events. He’s the second-fastest swimmer in the class for the 500 free and 200 fly and the third-fastest for thew 200 free, and he’s also a top-ten ranked swimmer in the 100 fly.

Stanton might not be as big of a name as some of the top recruits in the past, but he’s still a unique talent who is well beyond his years. If anything, people will begin to know his name very soon.

BONUS LOOKBACK:

Feeling nostalgic? Here’s a look back at our historic recruiting class rankings, plus our retrospectives of those classes after four NCAA seasons: