The official psych sheets for the 2017 NCAA Men’s Swimming & Diving Championships have been released, which for the first time verifies the athletes and relays who are invited to compete in the swimming side of the meet. After some back-and-forth from the NCAA about whether or not to allow times from the ECAC championship meet to count, things have settled exactly where they started: The top 29 swimmers in each event have been invited, plus the 2 best from the 30 line.
Once a swimmer is invited in an individual event, they can then compete in any other event in which they have a “B” time, up to the maximum of 3 (or 2 if they are to swim 5 relays).
These lists can still change – by way of swimmers scratching. There’s usually at least one of those each season, though thus far the women’s meet, for what it’s worth, haven’t seen any in 2017.
wpDiscuz
SEC: 64
Pac-12: 54
ACC: 46
B1G: 33
Big 12: 15
212 swimmers (90.2%) came from “Power 5” conferences.
23 swimmers came from other schools, including 8 from the Ivy League.
Is Big XII really just all the Texas guys? Anyone else from that conference make it?
No other team/team members from the Big12 made it other than Texas
That’s correct. No invites for TCU or West Vigrinia, so Texas is the full Big 12 contingent.
Its just a matter of time before the Big12 falls apart – Texas and Oklahoma will go to other conferences (SEC or PAC12) and the rest of the schools will be scrambling to find a place or will become part of a residual non power conference.
Harambe, the big 12 is a very strong conference in other sports. It is far from falling apart. For example men’s and women’s basketball, cross country, track etc. it is actually regarded by many as the toughest men’s basketball conference in the country
Half of those from the Ivy League are from Harvard, plus three invited relays.
Well, none are from Princeton, so that’s not much of a surprise.
Average number of invited swimmers per men’s team in each conference:
SEC-6.4
Pac-12: 8
ACC-3.8
B1G-3.3
Big 12-5
Something seems amiss – if they are supposed to take an even number from each event, how can the alternate list include multiple swimmers for the same event – e.g. 200 FL, 400IM, 100 BK, 1650 Free? and searching the psych sheet – many of the “alternates” are not even listed on the psyche sheet?
Here is the rule once they can’t put a swimmer in each event without going over 235 swimmers…
“At some point, the addition of one competitor per event to the entire order of individual events will put the field
over the total number of competitors cap. At this point, the remaining spaces will be allocated by comparing
the Division I championships record time for each individual event divided by the next entry time on the list.
The competitor who has the highest percentage (closest to the record) will be taken first, and so on until the
cap has been reached. *Please see the procedures below for breaking ties at the final selection spot.”
So after all… Read more »
Wahooswimfan – alternates would not be listed on the psych sheet, because they’re not invited yet. An equal number isn’t TAKEN from each event, an equal number is INVITED from each event. There are multiple swimmers in an event on the alternate list because to get to 10 on the alternate list, you have to reach into the 31 line. Isaac Jones, Mick Litherland, Michael McBryan, and Karl Luht are on the 31 line. The rest are on the 32 line.
Thanks for clarifying – so you could conceivably have all 10 alternates from one event if those were the next 10 closest by percentage?
Not quite. The reason there aren’t more alternates from the 30 line isn’t that the 31 liners are closer to the record, it’s that the rest of the 30 liners are already qualified in other events.
So, you could have 3 or 4 alternates from one event…if all of the 30, 31, 32 liners in the other events were already invited in other races. Does that make sense? Once a swimmer is invited, they’re taken out of the equation for the cutoff because their 2nd or 3rd events don’t actually impact the number of ATHLETES qualified.
Big10 is heavy in all the freestyle events
50/100/ 200/ 500/ 1650
# of participants by conference
Big10-4/4/3/3/3
ACC-1/2/2/2/3
SEC-3/3/1/2/2
Big12-1/0/1/2/1
Pac12-1/1/2/1/1
Ivy-0/0/1/0/0
Don’t know how you counted numbers, but UF has 4 guys in the 1650 alone
Psych sheet PAC12 in freestyle events:
50 – 6
100 – 4
200 – 7
500 – 5
1650 – 4
That’s what I counted anyway. Didn’t count other conferences……
Did I misunderstand ?
Is this accurate? Just glancing at the 50 free, I see 7 (3 auto, 4 invited) participants from the Big 12. You have listed 1.
The Ivy League also has a swimmer in each freestyle event.
Ivy has two in the mile, one on 50.
the times of the alternates are ridiculous…amazing that at least for now they aren’t invited…doesn’t make sense to me that NCAA Div 1 women have bigger invite list (yes i know its their day but just saying…..)
The number of invites are based on the total number of athletes in a sport across the NCAA. That’s why more women get invited. They have more competition.
As a result of Title 9 which has effectively cut men’s swimming from being able to fledge as many teams
I’ll fix this for you–“As a result of outrageous football and basketball budgets which have effectively cut men’s swimming from being able to fledge as many teams.”
@DMSwim I’ll fix this for you. At most D1 universities, the basketball program pays for itself, and the revenue from football pays for itself and all other sports.
no they dont
http://www.ethosreview.org/intellectual-spaces/is-college-football-profitable/
That’s not true at all. It’s barely true for less than 10 schools and even in those cases the math is fishy. They leave out costs all over the place. Athletic training, tutoring, etc. are often not included in budgets to make them looks smaller.
Are you delusional? Please give me some stats on this to back up your ridiculous claim. The article “THESILENTMAJORITY” cites below shows you are wrong.
At many universities, no football program = no swim program, no cross country program, no gymnastics program, no volleyball program, and so on. You could eliminate football (i.e., University of Chicago) and let the chips fall where they may with all other sports from a funding perspective. You’d end up with DIII/NAIA-level, club sports, and intramurals at many universities.
I’m not advocating cutting football completely; I’m just advocating more responsible spending. So many schools funnel donations and budgets into recruiting lounges at stadiums, complete weight room remodels every 5 years, and excessive staffs who travel with the teams for football and basketball. This kind of spending is unnecessary and I doubt is the reason recruits choose a school. They choose a school based on how good the team is, how much playing time they will get, and the coaching staff. Nice facilities are important, but after a certain minimum standard, I doubt they make that much of a difference.
Title IX does not cut men’s swimming. Title IX equalizes resources spent on men’s and women’s activities at universities and public schools. The problem lies in the sports on which schools spend their resources. Football accounts for 80-120 Scholarships and a huge budget. That leaves ver little for other sports.
Yes and there isn’t an equivalent women’s sport of that size so to equalize resources, more women’s sports must be offered. Thanks for your explanation!
Some have suggested that excluding football from the NCAA, and having it under the auspices of a separate independent organization such as the CFA, could exclude the 85 football scholarships from NCAA consideration. This would allow for greater male:female equality in the NCAA Title IX “non-football” sports. This of course would be against the spirit of Title IX. Amortizing the football scholarships as representing, perhaps 1/2 a scholarship could even out the Title IX mandates taking into account the unintended consequences of football’s uneven scholarship requirements. This practical compromise would be akin to counting divers as 1/2 of a participant to an NCAA or Championship roster—an ingenious maneuver that prevents divers from being excluded by myopic swimming coaches. In lieu… Read more »
**Correction top 10 in the events
Yes, wouldn’t it be great for Jack Conger to win an NCAA title. He swims so many events well, but hasn’t reached the top of the podium.
Maybe the 200 fly this year will be his triumph.
Are there really this many anti-Conger people on SwimSwam? How does this even rate ONE down vote?
I believe the down votes were STATE-ments.
Conger is considering training at NC State next year. He wants to get far far away from Schooling and get back home to the east coast. With Eddie getting close to retirinment it might be time to move on. NC State has the hottest thing going on right now.
Ummm… he’s a senior and won’t have any college eligibility left. Otherwise, it was a brilliant comment, especially the “retirinment” part.
The ones who down voted are Schooling fans.
Have you ever met Conger? Just wondering. He might be a great guy but doesn’t come across well. Not just my observation. I’m not a fan.
I am not Anti-conger at all. I downvoted because people say these things as if Conger was entitled to a NCAA title to start with. He was present the last 3 competitions, and if he didn’t get it is because he wasn’t good enough. And there are plenty other who are going to finish college without evn a medal so conger’s situation is not that bad
Pretty sure he can still shine his Olympic gold medal.
I am not anti-Conger and certainly not pro-Schooling. But, I also don’t see where Conger deserves to win any more than any other swimmer who works hard, has a good attitude, etc. Conger has accomplished WAY more than most other college swimmers and his college career should not be viewed in any lesser terms if he doesn’t ever finish on top of the podium. Sorry, I don’t feel bad for him – he’s had a great career and gone to the Olympics, etc. – done many things that others (even others who “deserve” it equally as much) will ever dream of.
I would love to see him finish ahead of Schooling, but I don’t think he deserves a win… Read more »
I think this is his year. The 200 fly he swam at conferences was insanely fast and I went a little under the radar. And everyone knows Texas brings their best to NCAAs. Eddie said that Schooling took a while to get back to training, and while I don’t doubt his speed I feel like his endurance isn’t quite as good as Conger’s.
Wow, am I reading correctly that Olympic 4th place finisher Santo Condorelli did not qualify in the 100 freestyle?
Condorelli qualified in the 50 free and the 100 fly, meaning he was below the cut line (invited times) for those events. Since he has a ‘B’ time in the 100 free, he will be able to swim that as well. So, his 100 free time was not what got him “invited” to NCAA’s, but he will still (presumably) swim it.
Got it, thanks for the reply. I thought a swimmer needed an “A” cut for their “B” times to come into play. Should have read the article more closely.
I know I’m not the first to say it but, to me, NCAA’s is more exciting and interesting than anything else in swimming, including Olympics.
Don’t get Bobo started on the “bathtub.”
You can have a great show even in a bathtub! 🙂
But sorry guys. Even if I like watching these college races now much more than a few years ago, I don’t buy that it’s more interesting than olympic games. Please let’s stay serious. It’s just different. It’s all about the team and for that reason it’s very interesting. We see most of best American swimmers and that’s great. But it’s a different sport. I will always prefer watching someone really talented beat someone less talented in the big pool while the opposite is possible in yards where underwaters take a huge part and real swimming is less important. And nothing can replace the fact that the best swimmers of… Read more »
If you take Phelps out of all the recent Olympics, not sure the Olympics are really more interesting. Especially as more international stars compete at NCAAs: you get to see them PLUS more than just two of the fastest US stars. Sure Peaty’s fun to watch, but it’s one event. Same with Ervin, Adrian, and Flo in the 50. Ledecky’s great, but what’s interesting about watching someone annihilate the field in a distance event? You take the NBCSports story line of Phelps out, and suddenly the Olympics loses a lot of appeal. There’s nothing more ridiculous than seeing one of the very fastest (Cielo, Vlad, Dressel) swim the 50 free SCY. It’s like watching a speedboat.
Agreed 100%. Yes the NCAAs are fun but no way can they be compared to the olympics. Part of the fun of NCAAs is speculating how well the athletes will do on the world stage with the biggest stage being the Olympics.
It does not have the glory of the Olympics, and I prefer long course, but the NCAA meet format is much more fun.
1. No semifinals! (There are B finals, but nobody coasts)
2. Five relays.
3. A guy like Murphy or Schooling might swim 14 races in 3 days.
4. Team scoring.
5. Rosters change every year.
And, last years’ men’s 1650.
“And last year’s men’s 1650.” Especially with Rowdy’s commentary. Lapped or winner?
I think its where you see the real development happen for swimmers on their way to International and Olympic success. This years example is Cameron Craig. Last year it was Townley Haas
Dean Farris.
#SaveFarris
Or you watch someone fall on their face but still come back for Olympic success —- Clark Smith last year.
I mean… I personally prefer ncaas. It’s shorter, faster the crazy underwaters are enjoyable to watch too. Also since SCY is what I swim in every day it’s just easier to relate to. Nothing to take away from the Olympics it’s just a preference thing. Also I disagree with the fact that a swimmer is more talented if they dominate long course opposed to dominating short course. They’re two different skills frankly and certain people are better at one or the other.
The team competition adds so much – the excitement and interest in seeing who finishes 7th or 9th, etc. is way beyond those same results in the Olympics.