The 2026 NCAA Division I Swimming & Diving Championships will very look different. The CSCAA’s proposed format changes have stirred debate across the sport, and veteran coach Brian Schrader has stepped forward publicly to say he does not support them.
On the GMM Podcast, I sat down with Coach Schrader to talk through his concerns:
- why he believes the changes could alter the competitive fabric of NCAA swimming
- how they may affect athletes and programs across the country
- and what the broader implications could be for the future of the championship meet
Schrader is not a casual observer. He’s spent more than three decades on the NCAA DI deck, watching the sport evolve from multiple vantage points, assistant coach, head coach, program builder, and now associate head coach at one of the nation’s largest athletic departments. His perspective carries the weight of experience and the clarity of someone who has lived inside the system.
Coach Schrader agreed to come on the GMM podcast, but stipulated that he would be speaking for himself and not Ohio State University. He’s commenting as a veteran DI coach who also has deep experience in swimming governance. Schrader has served as a USA Swimming committee liaison with Steering, the Athletes’ Executive Committee, and Open Water. He’s served on the ISCA Board, the CSCAA Executive Board, and most recently on the USA Swimming Coaches Advisory Committee.
If I missed any questions, drop them in the comments.
SEE COACH BRIAN SCHRADER‘S FULL STATEMENT POSTED TO INSTAGRAM FEB 16TH:
To My Division I Peers & Colleagues
As we approach championship season, I want to share my perspective on the changes recommended and advocated for by the College Swimming and Diving Coaches Association of America (CSCAA) that have significantly affected our Division I NCAA Championship meet and many of our conference championships. In my opinion, these changes have not served our coaches or our student-athletes well.
These views are entirely my own. I do not speak on behalf of any team or organization.
Over the course of my career, I have been fortunate to coach at every level of Division I athletics. I have been part of three NCAA Championship teams (2x Texas Men, 1x Georgia Women) and 22 Division I conference championship teams (SEC, Big Ten, Summit League, Sun Belt, and Southwest Conference). I have coached within “have” programs and “have-not” programs, and I built one of the top mid-major programs in the country at the University of Denver.
My governance experience has also been extensive. I worked five years with USA National Teams, serving as committee liaison with Steering, the Athletes’ Executive Committee, and Open Water. I have served on the ISCA Board, the CSCAA Executive Board (Secretary), and most recently the USA Swimming Coaches Advisory Committee. I have supported change when it strengthens our sport. I do not support change that diminishes opportunity or excellence.
As a former mid-major head coach who qualified and scored athletes – including rare relay invites – I believe the “golden ticket” approach overreaches.
It feels like a policy influenced disproportionately by mid-major interests at the expense of competitive integrity.
True opportunity comes from recruiting, development, and performance – not from diluted qualification standards.
These Decisions Were Made Without Adequate Consultation, With Questionable Timing, and Poor Leadership.
• Format and qualifying changes were implemented without a secured television contract. Why concede so much without guaranteed return?
• The narrative that coaches were fully consulted does not align with what many experienced. Membership dues should guarantee representation — not require convention attendance to have a voice.
• Several Power 4 coaches have expressed feeling blindsided.
• These changes came amid COVID recovery, NIL adjustments, and roster reductions — a time when stability was essential.
The Division I NCAA Championships Used to Be the Most Elite Event to Qualify for in the World. NOW IT IS NOT.
• Qualification should not be about participation; it should be about performance.
• The new qualifying procedures have reduced the field and left faster athletes at home.
• Swimming has always been simple: the fastest athletes go. Period.
• We are not basketball seeking “Cinderella” stories.
• We are not track and field with fundamentally different qualification structures.
• Eliminating B finals removes critical competitive opportunity — especially for the rare and hard-earned mid-major qualifier.
The Loss of Opportunities is Catastrophic. More Than 50% of Athlete Opportunities Were Lost With the Elimination of B Finals.
• B finals created some of the most meaningful developmental moments in collegiate swimming — athletes learning to perform at night, to compete under pressure, to move up.
• Many of our current and former national team athletes began their elite trajectory through those finals swims.
• Removing these races diminishes elite development.
• It also removes energy and engagement from finals sessions. Teams without swims may disengage. The competitive atmosphere will suffer.
• Most NCAA legislation allows a year for adjustment. These changes were implemented immediately, forcing mid-season alterations to invites and conference meets.
This is Not How Championship Preparation Should be Managed.
The CSCAA Must Be Held Accountable
• Lost opportunities will not return.
• Power 4 programs are not being adequately represented.
- Membership dues are being directed toward new event formats and hand-picked teams in ways many members did not authorize.
• Advocacy efforts outside the sport’s direct governance have produced little tangible benefit for membership.
• Governance conflicts of interest must be addressed. No credible nonprofit or corporate organization would allow structural conflicts at the executive level to persist unchecked.
Change is Needed—Not at Our Championships, But With Leadership.
Our full-time executive structure has failed to protect athlete opportunity and competitive excellence. Accountability must come before further damage is done.
Our sport has always been about clarity, performance, and integrity. We owe our athletes nothing less.
—Coach Brian Schrader
SEE THE FULL PODCAST TRANSCRIPT HERE.
Follow Coach Brian Schrader on Instagram here.
Follow Gold Medal Mel on Instagram here.
Many thanks to Swimoutlet.com for their 14 year partnership and support of this swimming news and media.
SEE RECENT GMM PODCASTS:
This is a Gold Medal Media production presented by SwimOutlet.com. Host Gold Medal Mel Stewart is a 3-time Olympic medalist and the co-founder of SwimSwam.com, a Swimming News website.
Opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the interviewed guests do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of the hosts, SwimSwam Partners, LLC and/or SwimSwam advertising partners.
If they don’t reinstitute B finals again after this year, then heads should roll. Has anyone ever set up one legitimate petition (not multiple petitions across multiple sites and not polls that only have 100 respondents). I’m talking about a change.org petition, or something like that so every swimmer, parent, coach, swim fan, etc can sign so the fools who made these unnecessary changes can see how wildly unpopular they are. (’m assuming they know how wildly unpopular the changes are, whether they receive a petition or not. But it’s nice to have documented proof of the opposition.
Unintended consequences of the qualifying rule change. Two Big 12 girls got in only because of golden ticket. One only ranked #59 in event. Secondly, three midmajor swimmers DIDN’T get into event because of new rule. They earned a spot in top 38/39 on their own merit, then got (somewhat randomly) jumped by other midmajors swimmers who won a slower midmajor conference.
Is it possible to get a list of coaches who actually attended last year’s CSCAA annual meeting or a list of coaches who ran to be on the CSCAA board last year and did not get elected?
Given that any coach who coaches at the collegiate level can be a member and attend the CSCAA annual meeting, I’m wondering if these changes are a result of a small group of people working in a vacuum or a large group of people who didn’t bother to show up or get involved. I genuinely don’t know.
I think, judging by the makeup of the cscaa it’s the latter the power 4 coaches didn’t put themselves in the room where decisions got made. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I wonder if everyone knew that the CSCAA would be given this level of power…
Good for someone to speak up. There are hundreds more of us who are shocked at this organizations sneaky agenda. No parent nor swimmer wanted to eliminate b finals. Last year over 50 percent of b finalists 60 percent women and 50 percent men went faster in the finals compared to prelims. U of Richmond coach and his executive director wife pushed this through. He was hoping after a good 2025 to get a bunch of his swimmers to the NCAA meet because they were too at Conference last year …he only got 1 for 2026.
The cscaa is an organization filled with programs who don’t send swimmers to the NCAA meet let alone have finalists. How can they… Read more »
This reeks of some 20 something marketing phenom who knows nothing about swimming. It seems more akin to the CEO of Cracker Barrell than someone who truly understands the sport and how it fits in college athletic departments. Let’s say this 20 something know-it-all who came up with this hair brained idea is actually correct and we get 100,000 more viewers and even a low level contract with a third tier cable network. Realistically, how much money would this generate for each school? Peanuts. We have ruined the college swimming national championship for….. Peanuts.
Some peanuts are better than none
Not at the price of ruining the experience of the NCAA Championship for the athletes.
This says it all about the short-sightedness surrounding our beloved sport…
Brian – “Mel, have we seen opportunities come back?”
Mel – “No.”
Let’s hope leadership within the sport can alter this trajectory.
Very true. I cannot think of any opportunities that swimming has lost and then we’ve gotten a second chance to get them back.
…I should add that Sam Barany, Exec Dir CSCAA, has said repeatedly that if the changes do not work, they will continue to adjust. Moreover, she did say CSCAA will review the performance of the new changes and share them publicly.
>that if the changes do not work, they will continue to adjust
Lol is this code for the beatings will continue until morale improves?
How will “work/doesn’t work” be measured?
Very quietly and behind closed doors.
“the beatings will continue until morale improves”
the old chestnut does still in fact apply
She is anticipating a level of flexibility for the NCAA that I don’t think will actually be there. I think those stakeholders will be reticent to make changes year over year like that.
What exactly does swimming think they are going to get from ESPN by eliminating the B Finals? I was told that it has something to do with being a better product for the viewer. The problem is that 99% of the people that watch NCAA swimming are swimmers/former swimmers. I know we’re trying to grow the sport, but Olympic Sports have been around for a long time, and they just don’t get the same interest as most non Olympic Sports.
And would they adjust backwards possibly?
In what world does having fewer points on offer at night make a more exciting session?
People tune in more when the game is on the line. The elimination of the B final reduces the importance of the finals session and makes it less likely that the game will be on the line in that last session.
If scoring only the top 8 would make the meet almost decided before it starts, scoring 16 and only swimming 8 in finals is the next worst idea for competitive excitement.
I do think having the score displayed and updated after each session would add to the excitement. You would see a lot of back and forth especially early in the meet.
I disagree with Brian. These changes are about an issue that is larger than just the NCAA championship meets. They are about keeping college swimming (and competitive swimming as a whole) relevant in today’s marketplace. USA Swimming is losing money and has lost significant membership since the pandemic. College swimming programs, and most college athletic departments, are losing money. In the age of NIL and paying college athletes, swimming is endangered. Programs are already being shrunk and cut altogether. The best thing that the NCAA can do for swimming as a whole is to expand overall interest in the sport by getting more eyeballs on the championship meets. Including athletes from more conferences and making the events more broadcast-friendly are… Read more »
These format changes will have ZERO effect on some random person keeping his TV on ESPN2, during MARCH MADNESS. This will not help grow the sports in terms of eyeballs and attention
how many year round subscribers to ESPN2 have any interest in swimming!
as swim fans we subscribe for one month, and then cancel before we are charged another $12.99
Just like Brian said – they made these changes before they even secured a TV contract. Why are they changing the contest?
It would be one thing if whoever was buying the show rights said, ” Cut it down to this time, allow for this much ad space,” but that’s not the case at all.
ESPN is pushing content for their app streaming service, which, last I checked, is about $30 a month (very high IMO), plus ads. As a result, no time restriction is needed; they could have a full meet unchanged, dictate the running of ads between A finals and B Finals, or even between each dive attempt. That app isn’t going to draw in any new viewers;… Read more »