Scoring the NCAA Men’s D1 Pre-Selection Psych Sheet

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

In This Story

62
Leave a Reply

19 Comment threads
43 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
40 Comment authors
newest oldest most voted
PK Doesn't Like His Long Name

I feel sorry for the guys in the non-circle seeded heat in the 100 fly that will have Dressel in it.

2 Cents

Why? Because they wont get a fun dip or airhead or ribbon for winning the heat like a summer league meet?

They get to actually race the best swimmer in the world and get that experience. Why is that bad?

Observer

Indiana wins with diving. No doubt about it now

Joe

People are downvoting you but if they swim as well or better as they did at Big 10s and win 2-3 relays, they have a shot at it. (Saying this as a Cal fan)

Observer

Agree! Indiana only has 8 swimmers qualified but out of those 8 I’m guessing only maybe 2 were fully rested. All 8 are in scoring position and with diving and high scoring relays they will be tough to beat. Also note that Blake P is entered in the 50 with a dual meet time and will likely score big there too. Will be tough to beat Cal but it can be done if everyone swims to their potential. Just my thoughts. NC State I think similar to last year went big for conference which will hurt them at NCAA. Texas seems to have lost their mojo—but we’ve all said that before and been proven wrong. Fun meet ahead that’s for… Read more »

Blake's Beard

I’ve been causing the team a lot of drag and friction. I had to let Blake go and join his leg her back at the B1G hotel

joe

Yep – looks like the most exciting team race in at least four years. Could be very tight among the top five seeds, especially since Florida probably gets +20 from their seeding for Dressel in the 100 fly.

Looking at the psych sheet a little more closely, though, Indiana doesn’t have much room for error, or much room to go up – Finnerty, Lanza, Brock, and Pieroni all have fairly high seeds in tight events (though Pieroni may do well in the 50 as you said). They probably also need to move up in the 200 medley as well, which should be doable since they had a slow free split at conference.

Horninco

Texas has hardly lost its mojo. Psych scored with the same number of points as last year. Should be an extremely competitive meet this year, and I’d take the field over Texas to be conservative, but we all know that those guys aren’t even tapered. They’ve shown up to swim the last three years. If Texas doesn’t win it will most likely be due to a lack of a breastroker for the medley relays. Look for Schooling to swim the breast legs on those relays

Cmon

First of all, many of them didn’t drop or didn’t drop much from conference to NCAA last year. Second of all, many of them swam lights out lifetime best all meet (backstroke and breastroker come to mind). So why would you say there not tapered? Is Finnerty about to throw down a 49? I think I would guess they are less tapered than cal, way less tapered than Texas, and about as tapered as flor/NC state

Horninco

Responding to me? Texas is notoriously untapered or even rested during the season and conference meet. They lost a dual meet to atm this year, whom they will smoke by 400 points at NCAA. Last year every pertinent Texas swimmer improved between conference and NCAA’s except Joe Schooling swam .01 slower than his seed in the 50 Free. I think a few of the younger guys that were trying to make cuts were slightly rested at the conference Tri-meet. They will be much faster at NCAA’s except for maybe a few young guys. I’m also curious about Shebat Texas also won’t be able to count on a bunch of cal DQ’s this year. I bet this comes down to the… Read more »

Horninco

And Joes really odd 200 fly. He had a weird meet

Cmon

I was reply to original comment. Talking about Indiana not texas

Mike

Cmon I think you mean the IU guys were more tapered than all of those teams for conferences

Aventidor

Yeah chances are IU won’t get 1,2,3,4 in diving like they did at B1Gs

What

I don’t recall IU going 1,2,3,4 at B1G in diving. Lol.

FirstTimeCaller

True. You have to wonder if IU’s divers were fully tapered for B1Gs

2 Cents

They were not. I saw it with my own eyes. Some of them still had hair on their legs and chests. They also did NOT suit up. I swear. I also heard that they still did full workouts where they were still doing flips and twists before and after the meet… Just saying…

IUFAN

I’m a big IU fan so wish your prediction would come true, however, they likely don’t have the numbers to win this year. Teams like Texas, Cal, Florida and USC showed very little of their potential at conference meets, while IU probably won’t drop much more time, nor move up from seeds. I think they can definitely battle for 3rd though, especially if their divers come through.

Interesting to compare to last year’s scored psych sheet, which also had NC State winning: https://swimswam.com/nc-state-leads-scored-ncaa-pre-selection-psych-sheet/

Silent Observer

But do we feel they went as hard for ACCs this year, as the previous year?

I personally am hoping no and they can fight for a 2nd-3rd place. Wishful thinking, yes. But I really think they are in a lifetime position this year to do so. Next year will be a big loss of many key seniors (slight rebuilding)

Cmon

I do feel they went about the same as hard as past years. What what leads you to beleive they shifted priorities to train through conference? They put up very fast times both this and last year.

Don't want to miss anything?

Subscribe to our newsletter and receive our latest updates!