2025 NCAA Division I Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships
- March 19-22, 2025
- Weyerhaeuser King County Aquatics Center — Federal Way, Washington
- Short Course Yards (25 yards)
- Meet Central
- Official Psych Sheets
- SwimSwam Preview Index
- Live Results
- Full Results (PDF)
The 2025 Women’s NCAA Championships came to a close on Saturday night with the Virginia Cavaliers rolling to their fifth consecutive national title, becoming just the third program to do so in the sport’s history.
Led by the Walsh sisters, the UVA victory was, as expected, a decisive one, topping runner-up Stanford by 127 points, while the Cardinal were surprise 2nd-place finishers as they edged out Texas after the Longhorns were the runners-up to the Cavaliers for the previous three seasons.
Stanford snatching the 2nd-place spot from Texas was one of several surprises in the team standings relative to our final edition of the power rankings.
2024-25 Women’s NCAA Power Rankings:
Below, find the top 25 teams from the championships alongside our final predictions as we take a look at what we got right, what we got wrong and what we got really wrong.
2025 WOMEN’S NCAA RESULTS VERSUS SWIMSWAM PICKS
| Finish | Team | Final Power Ranking | Difference |
| 1 | Virginia | 1 | – |
| 2 | Stanford | 3 | ↑1 |
| 3 | Texas | 2 | ↓1 |
| 4 | Indiana | 6 | ↑2 |
| 5 | Tennessee | 5 | – |
| 6 | Florida | 4 | ↓2 |
| 7 | Louisville | 10 | ↑3 |
| 8 | Cal | 7 | ↓1 |
| 9 | Michigan | 9 | – |
| 10 | NC State | 8 | ↓2 |
| 11 | USC | 11 | – |
| 12 | Wisconsin | 12 | – |
| 13 | Miami (FL) | 21 | ↑8 |
| 14 | Ohio State | 13 | ↓1 |
| 15 | Alabama | 15 | – |
| 16 | Georgia | 14 | ↓2 |
| 17 | UNC | 16 | ↓1 |
| 18 | Purdue | 25 | ↑7 |
| 19 | Arizona State | 19 | – |
| 20 | Virginia Tech | 22 | ↑2 |
| 21 | Duke | 17 | ↓4 |
| 22 | LSU | 23 | ↑1 |
| 23 | BYU | NR | + |
| 24 | South Carolina | NR | + |
| 25 | Kansas | NR | + |
WHAT WE GOT RIGHT
- Virginia was a slam-dunk selection for the top spot, but after we nailed the top five in the correct order in 2024, that wasn’t the case this year. Besides the Cavaliers, the only other team we placed in the correct spot in the top five was 5th-place Tennessee. We also had Michigan, USC and Wisconsin in the rights spot at 9, 11 and 12, respectively, though the squads surrounding them were different than predicted.
- In the bottom half of the rankings, Alabama was correctly ranked at #15, as was Arizona State at #19.
- Ohio State and UNC were two teams in particular we had the right idea for, but both ended up finishing one spot lower than predicted due to the surprise Miami (FL) Hurricanes.
WHAT WE GOT WRONG – TOP 10
- No one picked Stanford to beat Texas in the race for 2nd, but the Cardinal pulled it off, registering their highest finish since winning the title in 2019. Stanford was only ranked 4th based on psych sheet scoring coming into the meet, but finished with four swimmers scoring 40+ points and outscored their projected individual total by 52 points and their relays by 18 (they also got 14 diving points).
- Texas fell to 3rd after being unanimously picked to finish 2nd despite scoring 92 diving points, which was the most of any team.
- Indiana was picked 6th but ended up placing 4th with 312 points, finishing 14 clear of Tennessee and 80 ahead of Florida. The Hoosiers scored 47 diving points, but more importantly, outscored their psych sheet score in the pool by 56.5 points.
- The Gators finished two spots lower than predicted in 6th—they outscored their projected relay points by 12, but scored 33.5 fewer individually.
- Louisville, known for executing their taper at NCAAs, did so once again, landing in 7th place after we predicted them 10th. The Cardinals scored the exact number of individual swimming points they were projected to, but outscored their relay psych sheet total by 30, earning 130 relay points to rank 3rd among all teams.
- Cal finished one spot lower than predicted in 8th, as they were edged out by Louisville by just seven points. This was more the Cardinals performing well than it was the Bears swimming poorly. Cal outscored their projections both in relays and individually.
- NC State fell two spots from their prediction to 10th, their lowest finish since 2018. The Wolfpack underperformed in the relays relative to their seed, scoring 83 relay points after they were seeded for 112. They finished outside the top eight in three of the five relays, including placing 16th in the 800 free relay (as the 11th seed).
OTHER SURPRISES
- The team that outperformed our predictions the most was Miami (FL), which dove to a 13th-place finish after they were predicted to place 21st. The Hurricanes were seeded for 19 swimming points, and ended up only scoring 6.5, but it didn’t matter as their divers took care of business. Chiara Pellacani and Mia Vallee went 1-2 on 1-meter, and then finished 2-4 on 3-meter to combine for 69 points.
- The other standout team outside the top 10 was Purdue, which placed 18th after they were predicted 25th. The Boilermakers lost one of their key divers from last year, but it didn’t matter as Daryn Wright (26 points) and Sophia McAfee (21 points) combined for 47 of the team’s 53 points.
- Duke dropped four spots relative to their prediction, finishing 21st after they were picked 17th. The Blue Devils finished six points back of their projected psych sheet points in the pool, but only had seven diving points, which may have been lower than what some were projecting when casting their ballot.
MOVING UP & MOVING OUT
- BYU, South Carolina and Kansas all cracked the top 25 after they weren’t predicted to finish there. Mackenzie Miller led the way for the Cougars, scoring all 29 of their points, while diver Shiyun Lai scored all 25 of Kansas’ points. For South Carolina, diver Sophie Verzyl led the way with 15 points, while their 13 swimming points nearly doubled their psych sheet projection (seven).
- The teams we picked to finish in the top 25 that didn’t quite come through were Texas A&M, Pitt and Auburn. The Aggies placed 26th, the Panthers were 27th, and the Tigers fell to 35th.
| Finish | Team | Final Power Ranking | Difference |
| 26 | Texas A&M | 20 | ↓6 |
| 27 | Pitt | 24 | ↓3 |
| 35 | Auburn | 18 | ↓17 |
- Texas A&M only scored one individual swimming point after they were projected for six, though they registered 10 relay points after being seeded for none. They got 11 diving points from Else Praasterink after she scored 15 last year at Louisville.
- Pitt, seeded for 26 swimming points, finished with 21, with Sophie Yendell breaking through and making an ‘A’ final in the 50 free and also scoring in the 100 fly.
- Auburn finished with 10 points after scoring six in the 200 free relay and four in diving. They were seeded for 10 points in the pool, all in relays, and only managed to crack the top 16 in one of them. They were 17th twice and were disqualified in the 400 medley relay (though their time wouldn’t of cracked the top 16).
See the full NCAA Championship box score here.
Final Scores
| Team | Total | Individual Swim Points | Relay Points | Diving Points | Individual Score Count | Relay Score Count | Diving Score Count | |
| 1 | UVA | 544 | 344 | 194 | 6 | 26 | 5 | 1 |
| 2 | Stanford | 417 | 243 | 160 | 14 | 21 | 5 | 1 |
| 3 | Texas | 394 | 174 | 128 | 92 | 15 | 5 | 8 |
| 4 | Indiana | 312 | 148 | 117 | 47 | 13 | 5 | 5 |
| 5 | Tennessee | 298 | 178 | 120 | 0 | 17 | 5 | 0 |
| 6 | Florida | 232 | 122 | 110 | 0 | 15 | 4 | 0 |
| 7 | Louisville | 209.5 | 79.5 | 130 | 0 | 11 | 5 | 0 |
| 8 | California | 202.5 | 108.5 | 94 | 0 | 12 | 5 | 0 |
| 9 | Michigan | 196 | 81 | 114 | 1 | 9 | 5 | 1 |
| 10 | NC State | 164 | 81 | 83 | 0 | 10 | 5 | 0 |
| 11 | USC | 130 | 50 | 78 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 1 |
| 12 | Wisconsin | 126 | 70 | 56 | 0 | 6 | 5 | 0 |
| 13 | Miami (FL) | 75.5 | 6.5 | 0 | 69 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| 14 | Ohio State | 66 | 46 | 20 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 0 |
| 15 | Alabama | 65 | 29 | 36 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| 16 | Georgia | 58 | 34 | 24 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 0 |
| 17 | UNC | 57 | 4 | 2 | 51 | 3 | 1 | 4 |
| 18 | Purdue | 53 | 0 | 0 | 53 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| 19 | Arizona State | 41.5 | 5.5 | 36 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| 20 | VT | 37 | 25 | 12 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| 21 | Duke | 33 | 26 | 0 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| 22 | LSU | 32 | 0 | 4 | 28 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 23 | BYU | 29 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | South Carolina | 28 | 13 | 0 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| 25 | Kansas | 25 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | Texas A&M | 22 | 1 | 10 | 11 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| 27 | PITT | 21 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | Minnesota | 21 | 3 | 0 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | Arizona | 20 | 0 | 14 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 30 | SIU | 17 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| 31 | Houston | 16 | 13 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 32 | Cincinnati | 15 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 33 | Washington St. | 14 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| 34 | Nebraska | 13 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 35 | Auburn | 10 | 0 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 36 | Florida St | 8 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| 37 | UCLA | 7 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 38 | Princeton | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| 39 | Ohio | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 40 | Arkansas | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 41 | Akron | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 42 | Rutgers | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 43 | Fresno State | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
The story here seems like SEC underperforming and Stanford stepping up to take advantage. I wonder if that SEC championship meet being so high energy and fast actually puts them at a disadvantage when they try to do it again a month later. Stanford in contrast made a point of focusing on ncaas rather than ACCs and it clearly worked.
Would love to see the team scores if you took out 5y swimmers points. Just wondering…
So sad for Auburn. Makes my heart hurt. Hope they get back in it soon.
Over rated both women and men’s teams. Showed at SEC and NCAA championships.
I still laugh at the minus 40 deficit (versus the psych sheet rankings) on Day 4 for the University of Texas.
https://swimswam.com/2025-ncaa-womens-championships-day-4-scoring-analysis/
It’s the very definition of choke.
Well, yes, Miami (FL) beat all the predictions – which is great. But it was from diving, not swimming. Again, great for them, but it wasn’t truly a “bracket buster” for NCAAs.
Love this view. Shows who the best (Swimming) teams are vs. (Swimming/Diving). Wasn’t tracking that Carolina got only 6 swim points, or that TN finished 3rd on swim points alone.
Going into NCs the total number of A cuts by teams ranked in the top 10 were UVA 26, Stanford 14, Texas 13, Tennessee 10, Florida 10, Indiana 4, Cal 6, NC State 4, Michigan 4, and Louisville 1. There were 13 other A cuts (Bacon had 3 of them.)
Regarding Louisville, in many ways 10th seems like a reasonable pick, but I think the editors underestimated Louisville’s one A cut swimmer, Julia Dennis. Dennis wasn’t even listed as a BOTR recruit three years ago, and even though she placed in the consolation final as a freshman and finals as a sophomore, I think this still holds some people back in their evaluation of her.
Earlier in the season… Read more »
Regarding Stanford:
Coming into the meet there were five swimmers with 5 or more A cuts. G Walsh (60 pts), Curzan (57), A Walsh (54), Huske (54), and Sims (34). 34 points is a great meet for almost anyone, but not for someone with five A cuts.
Coming into the meet there were two swimmers with 4 A cuts, Bricker (50 points) and Sticklen (48).
The 5 swimmers with 3 A cuts were Stoll (24 points), Spink (31), Fuller (33), Shackley (37), and Bacon (45!)
There were several swimmers with 2 A cuts but none of them swam like Peplowski (45), Cox (40), Roghair (34) and Bell (49).
Other than Virginia, Stanford had far and away the best first… Read more »
Nordmann had a great meet! Wishing her the best in retirement
Nordmann, Dennis, Balduccini, and Paegle all had 1 A cut. They all had great meets and were really important in the team standings. Moesch, Hayes, and Gorman all had good meets for UVA, too, but vis-a-vis the team standings not as important.
Missed points from Roghair in the 200. Easy mistake since no one else scored in both the 1650 and 200 freestyles.
Thanks Unicorn.
54 + 50 + 49 + 40 = 193 points for Stanford’s first four.
Bray scored 42 points in 2023 and 36 points last year. Even though I’m a big believer in paying attention to the A cuts, I thought Bray would score well. Bray entered the meet with no A cuts and scored 2 points. (I should have listened to myself. Of course, Texas had other problems as well …)
I’m not sure how the number of A cuts someone has after their third matters, since you can only swim three individual events.
Bella did badly in one swim, but she did really well in the other two (plus all of the relays except one).
Thanks Mediocre Swammer. Here’s a look at the 400 IM:
There were 17 swimmers with A cuts in the 500, reflecting how slow the event was in the previous three years. I drew a new, imaginary A cut at 4:34.99 (9 swimmers in, 8 swimmers out*). Look at the prelims for the 500 and you will see the difference in who got a second swim. Bricker had 4 A cuts, including a cut in the 200 free from a dual meet. Grimes had 2 A cuts, and Weyant also had 2, although if we discount her 500* cut she only had one.
For me, Bricker was the obvious favorite in the 400 IM, and without a doubt someone would have… Read more »
UVA dominated for first, but the rest of the team places ended up making a very competitive and interesting meet. Hoping for similar competitiveness at the men’s meet!
Men’s should be an amazing team battle. There’s not going to be a star of the caliber of Gretchen, but the team race will more than make up for that (hopefully).