The pre-selection psych sheet was released this morning. The main purpose of this document is figuring out who qualified for the meet (our cut line analysis here). However, while this isn’t the final official psych sheet, the cut line will fall well below the scoring swimmers at 16th place and any event changes will be minor. Therefore scoring out this psych sheet gives a fairly valid impression of where teams stand heading into the meet. The biggest missing variable is diving which isn’t on the pre-selection psych sheet.
NC State lead the way with 385 points. Indiana are next with 350.5, then Cal with 340.5, and Texas with 322.
No one is seeded with a perfect 60 points. Auburn’s Hugo Gonzalez leads the way with 56. He is followed by Vini Lanza of Indiana with 52, Mark Szaranek of Florida with 49, Ryan Held of NC State with 48, and Coleman Stewart of NC State with 47.
Caeleb Dressel is seeded with only 40 as his 100 fly time has him seeded 78th. Texas’s highest scoring swimmer on the psych sheet is Joseph Schooling with 35 points. There should be plenty of movement from the psych sheet at the meet.
The highest single individual event scores are Indiana with 37 in the 100 breast, NC State with 36 in the 100 free, and Michigan with 36 in the 500.
Team Scores
| Team | Psych Points | Individual | Relay | |
| 1 | NC State | 385 | 213 | 172 |
| 2 | Indiana | 350.5 | 198.5 | 152 |
| 3 | California | 340.5 | 180.5 | 160 |
| 4 | Texas | 322 | 186 | 136 |
| 5 | Florida | 302 | 148 | 154 |
| 6 | Michigan | 218.5 | 148.5 | 70 |
| 7 | Southern Cali | 166 | 82 | 84 |
| 8 | Louisville | 152 | 72 | 80 |
| 9 | Auburn | 144 | 102 | 42 |
| 10 | Stanford | 129.5 | 85.5 | 44 |
| 11 | Alabama | 101 | 29 | 72 |
| 12 | Minnesota | 95 | 63 | 32 |
| 13 | South Carolina | 84 | 74 | 10 |
| 14 | Texas A&M | 83 | 37 | 46 |
| 15 | Tennessee | 80.5 | 10.5 | 70 |
| 16 | Harvard | 77 | 52 | 25 |
| 17 | Ohio St | 75 | 34 | 41 |
| 18 | Arizona | 60.5 | 38.5 | 22 |
| 19 | Florida St | 53 | 11 | 42 |
| 20 | Georgia | 49.5 | 49.5 | 0 |
| 21 | Missouri | 47 | 9 | 38 |
| 22 | Virginia | 46 | 26 | 20 |
| 23 | Arizona St | 43 | 21 | 22 |
| 24 | Notre Dame | 37.5 | 37.5 | 0 |
| 25 | Cornell | 27 | 27 | 0 |
| 25 | Grand Canyon University | 27 | 17 | 10 |
| 27 | Missouri St. M | 12 | 12 | 0 |
| 28 | Denver | 9 | 9 | 0 |
| 28 | Georgia Tech | 9 | 9 | 0 |
| 30 | West Virginia | 8 | 8 | 0 |
| 31 | Virginia Tech | 7 | 7 | 0 |
| 31 | Utah | 7 | 7 | 0 |
| 33 | Pacific | 6 | 0 | 6 |
| 34 | Loyola University Maryland | 5 | 5 | 0 |
| 35 | Kentucky | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| 35 | Penn | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| 35 | UNLV M | 2 | 2 | 0 |
Individual Points
| Name | School | Projected Points |
| Gonzalez, Hugo | Auburn | 56 |
| Lanza, Vini | Indiana | 52 |
| Szaranek, Mark | Florida | 49 |
| Held, Ryan | NC State | 48 |
| Stewart, Coleman | NC State | 47 |
| Seliskar, Andrew | California | 46 |
| Ipsen, Anton Oerskov | NC State | 44 |
| Auboeck, Felix | Michigan | 42 |
| Finnerty, Ian | Indiana | 41.5 |
| Dressel, Caeleb | Florida | 40 |
| Ress, Justin | NC State | 38 |
| Farris, Dean | Harvard | 37 |
| Apple, Zachary | Auburn | 35 |
| Schooling, Joseph | Texas | 35 |
| Katz, Austin | Texas | 32 |
| McHugh, Conner | Minnesota | 32 |
| Pieroni, Blake | Indiana | 32 |
| Becker, Bowen | Minnesota | 31 |
| Jackson, Tate | Texas | 31 |
| Lynch, Justin | California | 30 |
| Brock, Levi | Indiana | 29 |
| Mahmoud, Akaram | South Carolina | 28 |
| Shoults, Grant | Stanford | 28 |
| Vargas Jacobo, Ricardo | Michigan | 28 |
| Yeadon, Zach | Notre Dame | 28 |
| Evdokimov, Alex | Cornell | 27 |
| Switkowski, Jan | Florida | 27 |
| Josa, Matthew | California | 26 |
| Vazaios, Andreas | NC State | 26 |
| Minuth, Fynn | South Carolina | 25 |
| Samy, Mohamed | Indiana | 25 |
| Condorelli, Santo | Southern Cali | 24 |
| Castillo Luna, Mauro | Texas A&M | 22 |
| DeVine, Abrahm | Stanford | 21.5 |
| Haas, Townley | Texas | 21 |
| Montague, Jacob | Michigan | 21 |
| Acevedo, Javier | Georgia | 20.5 |
| Acosta, Marcelo | Louisville | 20 |
| Albiero, Nicolas | Louisville | 20 |
| Baqlah, Khader | Florida | 20 |
| Quah, Zheng | California | 18 |
| Lense, Noah | Ohio St | 17.5 |
| Nikolaev, Mark | Grand Canyon University | 17 |
| Schubert, Ted | Virginia | 17 |
| Fantoni, Gabriel | Indiana | 16 |
| Swanson, Charlie | Michigan | 16 |
| Wright, Justin | Arizona | 16 |
| Almeida, Brandonn | South Carolina | 15 |
| Glinta, Robert | Southern Cali | 15 |
| Mulcare, Patrick | Southern Cali | 15 |
| Novak, Brennan | Harvard | 15 |
| Ringgold, Brett | Texas | 15 |
| Somov, Evgenii | Louisville | 15 |
| Harty, Ryan | Texas | 14 |
| White, Evan | Michigan | 14 |
| Grieshop, Sean | California | 13 |
| Hoppe, Connor | California | 13 |
| Norman, Nick | California | 13 |
| Pomajevich, Sam | Texas | 13 |
| Reid, Christopher | Alabama | 13 |
| Tribuntsov, Ralf | Southern Cali | 13 |
| Cope, Tommy | Michigan | 12.5 |
| Delakis, Paul | Ohio St | 12.5 |
| Bish, Blair | Missouri St. M | 12 |
| Craig, Cameron | Arizona St | 12 |
| Litherland, Jay | Georgia | 12 |
| Bentz, Gunnar | Georgia | 11 |
| Holoda, Peter | Auburn | 11 |
| Kaleoaloha, Kanoa | Florida St | 11 |
| Newkirk, Jeff | Texas | 11 |
| Ogren, Curtis | Stanford | 11 |
| Powers, Paul | Michigan | 11 |
| Thorne, Nick | Arizona | 11 |
| Vissering, Carsten | Southern Cali | 11 |
| Dobbs, Chatham | Arizona | 10.5 |
| Thomas, Mike | California | 10.5 |
| Howard, Robert | Alabama | 10 |
| Bonetti, Brock | Texas A&M | 9 |
| Loncar, Anton | Denver | 9 |
| Poti, Zachary | Arizona St | 9 |
| Sweetser, True | Stanford | 9 |
| Armstrong, Jake | West Virginia | 8 |
| Molacek, Jacob | NC State | 8 |
| Claverie, Carlos | Louisville | 7 |
| Egan, Liam | Stanford | 7 |
| Gurevich, Etay | Louisville | 7 |
| Roberts, Jonathan | Texas | 7 |
| Ungur, Paul | Utah | 7 |
| Clark, Joe | Virginia | 6 |
| Rooney, Maxime | Florida | 6 |
| Sendyk, Pawel | California | 6 |
| Szabo, Norbert | Virginia Tech | 6 |
| Wielinski, Jacob | Missouri | 6 |
| Plaschka, Justin | Notre Dame | 5.5 |
| Calloni, Johannes | Stanford | 5 |
| Cono, Ben | Loyola University Maryland | 5 |
| Ferraro, Christian | Georgia Tech | 5 |
| Peribonio, Tom | South Carolina | 5 |
| Tybur, Jonathan | Texas A&M | 5 |
| Decoursey, Kyle | Tennessee | 4.5 |
| Babinet, Jeremy | Michigan | 4 |
| Carter, Dylan | Southern Cali | 4 |
| Coetzee, Ryan | Tennessee | 4 |
| Hoffer, Ryan | California | 4 |
| Kaliszak, Luke | Alabama | 4 |
| Pumputis, Caio | Georgia Tech | 4 |
| Stewart, Sam | Texas | 4 |
| Whitacre, Robert | Notre Dame | 4 |
| Barone, Jack | Ohio St | 3 |
| Blaskovic, Bruno | Indiana | 3 |
| Casey, Brendan | Virginia | 3 |
| Guest, James | Georgia | 3 |
| Higgins, Walker | Georgia | 3 |
| Liang, Andrew | Stanford | 3 |
| Manganiello, Blake | Florida | 3 |
| Schreuders, Mikel | Missouri | 3 |
| Shebat, John | Texas | 3 |
| Taylor, Michael | Florida | 3 |
| Andrew, Mark | Penn | 2 |
| Gonzales, Brad | UNLV M | 2 |
| Harting, Zach | Louisville | 2 |
| Jones, Isaac | Kentucky | 2 |
| Stevens, Peter | Tennessee | 2 |
| Stuart, Hennessey | NC State | 2 |
| Waddell, Zane | Alabama | 2 |
| Barna, Andrej | Louisville | 1 |
| Dudzinski, Ryan | Stanford | 1 |
| Loy, Andrew | Ohio St | 1 |
| Martinez, Jose | Texas A&M | 1 |
| Sand, Carson | California | 1 |
| Stone, Lane | Virginia Tech | 1 |
| Wich-Glasen, Nils | South Carolina | 1 |
| Wieser, Chris | Arizona | 1 |
Top 10 Teams Single Event Scores
| NC State | Indiana | California | Texas | Florida | Michigan | Southern Cali | Louisville | Auburn | Stanford | |
| 800 Freestyle Relay | 32 | 40 | 30 | 28 | 34 | 24 | 4 | 14 | 2 | 8 |
| 200 Freestyle Relay | 40 | 22 | 34 | 32 | 18 | 26 | 24 | 8 | 0 | 14 |
| 500 Freestyle | 15 | 0 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 36 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 21 |
| 200 IM | 7 | 16.5 | 27.5 | 0 | 31 | 13.5 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 16 |
| 50 Freestyle | 29 | 0 | 20 | 21 | 20 | 11 | 9 | 1 | 15 | 0 |
| 400 Medley Relay | 32 | 40 | 34 | 30 | 28 | 6 | 26 | 22 | 10 | 14 |
| 400 IM | 9 | 0 | 17 | 4 | 17 | 14 | 0 | 7 | 20 | 11 |
| 100 Butterfly | 31 | 17 | 27 | 20 | 13 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 200 Freestyle | 13 | 31 | 0 | 26 | 22 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 7 | 0 |
| 100 Breaststroke | 0 | 37 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 11 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| 100 Backstroke | 25 | 16 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 27 | 11 | 0 | 1 |
| 200 Medley Relay | 28 | 24 | 32 | 14 | 40 | 0 | 8 | 30 | 2 | 0 |
| 1650 Freestyle | 20 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 3 | 29 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 28 |
| 200 Backstroke | 14 | 11 | 0 | 41 | 3 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 16 | 5.5 |
| 100 Freestyle | 36 | 18 | 6 | 25 | 20 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 24 | 0 |
| 200 Breaststroke | 0 | 32 | 17 | 0 | 15 | 19 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 0 |
| 200 Butterfly | 14 | 20 | 27 | 28 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 |
| 400 Freestyle Relay | 40 | 26 | 30 | 32 | 34 | 14 | 22 | 6 | 28 | 8 |
NC State has been projected first for the past couple of years. They just can’t execute.
With the exception of of Chase Kalish’s 400 IM, every other current NCAA men’s swimming record is held by one of Joseph Schooling’s teammates. I think that’s kinda neat.
Most viewers can probably agree on the top 5 on the list ending up being the top 5 overall, but it will almost certainly be a different order. I’m personally pumped for the relays this year, no real run away favorites in any of them.
I find it hard to believe Ryan Hoffer will only score 4 points
Last year Indiana scored 62 points in diving and none of those guys graduated
As a Cal fan/alum I feel it’s my duty to initiate the annual moan and groan session about diving points…….and, begin…..
Texas divers just got 1st (Campbell), 4th (Windle) and 7th (Cornish) on 1M at Zones. Campbell and Windle already qualified, Cornish now sits in the 20th spot from Zone D, but I don’t understand the fuzzy math of qualifying in diving.
Windle just set the collegiate record for platform
recently. He will score high in platform. Campbell high in 1 and 3 meter. Windle will probably score
on boards as well.
Think it’s gonna be
1. Cal
2. Texas
3. NC State
4. Florida
5. IU
Gonna be an exciting team race for sure!
Don’t forget IU and Texas gets big points from diving
I am just skeptical that the IU swimmers will show up, they certainly underperformed last year.
I honestly flipped a coin between Cal and Texas, it’s gonna be really close
I’ve been scoring and predicting the winner of this meet for the past 10+ years, and I think I’ve only missed the winner once. I don’t score the psych sheet, I predict ups/downs based on best times from this year and last year’s NCAA meet. As of right now, I have Texas with 17 up, 11 down and Cal with 15 up, 14 down, including diving. With relays added, I have a final score of Texas 439, Cal 432. Which is the same thing as saying this is dead even and whoever hits their taper better and wants it more is likely to win.
Simply scoring the psyche sheet will significantly underestimate Texas. Most of Texas top 10 guys… Read more »
I agree with pretty much all of that except the breaststroke issue is overblown. Their medleys will final either way; a second faster or slower on the 100 breast leg (or half a second on the 50) won’t move them more than a couple of places. It’s like a 10-point swing. Whereas, whether John Shebat is healed from his injury is about a 30-point swing. Or whether Roberts can make 3 finals again, etc. They don’t have any margin for error like they did before.
Agree Shebat’s health matters more than breast on the relays, but in a meet this tight, everything matters. Say Texas gets 2nd in both medleys if they had a good breast leg, but only 6th with their current breast leg. That’s 20 points, which could cost them the meet.
Ed’s Medley lineup will be the most fascinating coaching decision to watch. Schooling may be he best option, but how do you take him off fly, where he dominates? I think Tate Jackson’s emergence could be key, because he can handle free, which can allow Ringgold to move to fly. That wasn’t really an option a week ago. Who else on the team can pop a good breast leg? Shebat?… Read more »
That’s a pretty good track record at predicting. Do you work with numbers and statistics a lot?
Texas is not as good as last year, but they still have some depth, like in backstroke.
If it comes down to the last relay, they’ve got a fantastic 400 free relay team.
What year were you wrong, who did you have winning, who won, was it close, and why do you think you were off?
As it turns out, most years, it’s not that hard to pick the winner. I haven’t looked at every year, but I think the only one we missed was Georgia in 2016 – we picked Stanford, who would have won without that relay DQ to open the meet.
But, like you said, this year is different. Cal vs. Texas is almost a dead heat. You’re dead-on when you say it’s going to come down to taper. I think there’s become an almost urban legend around both teams, because they’ve had some phenomenal swims, that they hit their tapers or training or championship prep or however you want to describe it perfectly every year. But, when you look at results, they… Read more »