2023 NCAA DIVISION I MEN’S SWIMMING & DIVING CHAMPIONSHIPS
- March 22-25, 2023
- Jean K. Freeman Aquatic Center | Minneapolis, MN
- SCY (25 yards)
- Meet Central
- Pre-Selection Psych Sheets
- Live Results
Data compiled by Andrew Mering.
With Tuesday’s release of the pre-selection psych sheets for the 2023 Men’s NCAA Championships, we’re now able to both project the individual cut line and score out the psych sheets for the event.
In the scored psych sheets, Cal projects to repeat as NCAA champions with 453.5 points on the board, though Arizona State is hot on their heels, just 27 points back.
Note that all current data includes NC State bringing 19 swimmers to the meet, which is more than the roster maximum (18).
The Golden Bears’ projected total is 95 points more than they were seeded to score last season (358.5), though they ultimately trounced that total by winning the meet with 487.5 points.
In fact, this season sees Cal, Arizona State and Florida all seeded to exceed 400 points after no team was projected to do so last year. This speaks to the dominance these three teams have both in terms of top performers and depth. Those three squads combine to have the top seed in 14 of 18 events, and are also well ahead of any other team in terms of total individual scoring swims.
The most shocking statistic to see on the scored psychs is the position of Texas. The Longhorn men have won five of the last seven NCAA titles and finished in the top two in eight straight seasons, but this year, they’re seeded to finish a distant seventh, a whopping 284 points back of Cal.
Last season, Texas finished second at NCAAs, 51 points back of Cal, with 436.5 points—425.5 not factoring in diving. They were seeded to score 351 (without diving). This year, their projected to score 169.5.
This is the lowest the team has been seeded to finish in recent years by a wide margin, and their diving group, while still stronger than most of the top teams, isn’t what it once was in terms of scoring potential.
There’s an argument to be made that Texas would have a much better seeding if it had more of a marquee conference championship title to vie for (hello SEC), since they could essentially swim through Big 12s and win easily. However, the Longhorns did suit up for their midseason invite and their dual with UVA earlier this season.
Either way you look at it, Texas swimmers will need to outperform their seeds in a big way over the course of the meet to be anywhere near contention.
The projections are, of course, just projections, and every season teams vary significantly from their psych sheet points to their actual scored points. But the numbers do give us a starting point to start previewing how the team race will unfold at the meet.
Note: these projections do not include diving, where athletes will be selected via NCAA Zone meets which are currently ongoing.
2023 NCAAS – PROJECTED TEAM STANDINGS
|School||Total Psych||Individual||Relay||Scoring Ind Count||Scoring Relay Count|
|California, University of, Berkeley||453.5||299.5||154||23||5|
|Arizona State University||426.5||254.5||172||25||5|
|Florida, University of||419.5||243.5||176||24||5|
|North Carolina State University||308||154||154||16||5|
|University of Tennessee||217.5||89.5||128||8||4|
|Texas, University of||169.5||114.5||55||11||4|
|Georgia, University of||128||80||48||10||3|
|Louisville, University of||125.5||45.5||80||4||5|
|Virginia, University of||97||26||71||4||4|
|Texas A&M University||92||66||26||8||3|
|Michigan, University of||86||46||40||6||5|
|Missouri, University of||73.5||36.5||37||5||4|
|Ohio State University||67.5||34.5||33||4||4|
|University of Alabama||51||29||22||2||3|
|University of Minnesota||33||33||0||2||0|
|Wisconsin, University of, Madison||25.5||25.5||0||4||0|
|Kentucky, University of||24||24||0||2||0|
|Arizona, University of||24||0||24||0||3|
|Georgia Institute of Technology||19.5||19.5||0||3||0|
|Notre Dame, University of||15||15||0||4||0|
|US Air Force Academy (M)||15||15||0||1||0|
|Southern Illinois Univ atCarbondale (M)||12.5||12.5||0||1||0|
|Utah, University of||11||11||0||1||0|
|Pittsburgh, University of||10||10||0||1||0|
|Louisiana State University||10||10||0||2||0|
|South Carolina, University of, Columbia||4||4||0||1||0|
|Southern Methodist University||2||2||0||1||0|
|Florida State University||1||1||0||1||0|
2022 Men’s NCAAs – Psych Sheets vs Actual Scoring (Top 10)
|Actual Finish||School||Psych Sheet Points||Actual Points*||Difference|
*Diving points not included
The top four teams last year outperformed their seed, with Cal and Texas in particular doing much better than their psych sheet positioning indicated.
Arizona State trailed their projection by 41 points one year ago, and after a monumental Pac-12 performance, it will be an interesting storyline to keep an eye on at NCAAs to see if the Sun Devils can execute a successful double-taper and vie for the national title.
2023 NCAAs – Projected Individual Scoring
With the top seed (and NCAA/U.S. Open Records) in the 200 breast, 200 IM and 400 IM, Leon Marchand leads the projected individual scoring race with the maximum of 60 points, having paced the field in 2022 with 57.
Fellow sophomore Jordan Crooks ranks second with 54 projected points, as he owns the top seed in the 50 free and the #2 spot in both the 100 free and 100 fly.
Besides Marchand, Cal’s Gabriel Jett is the only other swimmer with multiple top seeds, as he leads the 500 free and 200 fly while ranking 14th in the 200 free.
|Marchand,||Leon||Arizona State University||60|
|Crooks,||Jordan||University of Tennessee||54|
|Gonzalez de Oliveira,||Hugo||California, University of, Berkeley||49|
|Lasco,||Destin||California, University of, Berkeley||49|
|Liendo,||Josh||Florida, University of||49|
|Foster,||Carson||Texas, University of||45.5|
|Jett,||Gabriel||California, University of, Berkeley||43|
|Johnston,||David||Texas, University of||40|
|Savickas,||Aleksas||Florida, University of||37|
|Seeliger,||Bjorn||California, University of, Berkeley||36.5|
|Chaney,||Adam||Florida, University of||36|
|Cohen Groumi,||Gal||Michigan, University of||34.5|
|Magahey,||Jake||Georgia, University of||34|
|McHugh,||Max||University of Minnesota||33|
|Louser,||Jason||California, University of, Berkeley||32|
|Stokowski,||Kacper||North Carolina State University||31.5|
|Nelson,||Baylor||Texas A&M University||31|
|House,||Grant||Arizona State University||31|
|Dolan,||Jack||Arizona State University||31|
|Coll Marti,||Carles||VA Tech||28.5|
|McDonald,||Owen||Arizona State University||28|
|Hayes,||Aiden||North Carolina State University||27|
|Santos,||Guilherme||University of Tennessee||26.5|
|Whitley,||Reece||California, University of, Berkeley||26|
|Kos,||Hubert||Arizona State University||25|
|Petrashov,||Denis||Louisville, University of||25|
|Hillis,||Dillon||Florida, University of||23|
|Gaziev,||Ruslan||Ohio State University||23|
|Bustos,||Arsenio||North Carolina State University||22|
|Dahlgren,||Jack||Missouri, University of||22|
|Grum,||Ian||Georgia, University of||21|
|Sandidge,||Levi||Kentucky, University of||20|
|Mitchell,||Jake||Florida, University of||19|
|Nichols,||Noah||Virginia, University of||19|
|Dunham,||Bradley||Georgia, University of||18.5|
|McDuff,||Macguire||Florida, University of||18.5|
|Gallant,||Will||North Carolina State University||17|
|Newmark,||Jake||Wisconsin, University of, Madison||16.5|
|Hill,||Julian||Arizona State University||16|
|Hawke,||Charlie||University of Alabama||16|
|Colson,||Alexander||Arizona State University||16|
|Mefford,||Colby||California, University of, Berkeley||16|
|Mestre,||Alfonso||Florida, University of||15|
|Zhang,||Wen||US Air Force Academy (M)||15|
|Elaraby,||Abdelrahman||Louisville, University of||14.5|
|Watson,||Tyler||Florida, University of||14|
|Guiliano,||Chris||Notre Dame, University of||14|
|Sammon,||Patrick||Arizona State University||14|
|Secchi,||Clement||Missouri, University of||13.5|
|Johansson,||Victor||University of Alabama||13|
|Alexy,||Jack||California, University of, Berkeley||13|
|Van Renen,||Ruard||Southern Illinois Univ atCarbondale (M)||12.5|
|Henveaux,||Lucas||California, University of, Berkeley||12|
|Gray,||Andrew||Arizona State University||12|
|Kilavuz,||Mert||Georgia Institute of Technology||12|
|Fers Erzen,||Anze||Texas A&M University||12|
|Miller,||Luke||North Carolina State University||12|
|Rose,||Dare||California, University of, Berkeley||12|
|Hobson,||Luke||Texas, University of||11|
|Sarkany,||Zalan||Arizona State University||11|
|Corbeau,||Caspar||Texas, University of||11|
|Sanchez,||Alex||Texas A&M University||11|
|Ungur,||Andrei||Utah, University of||11|
|Curry,||Brooks||Louisiana State University||10|
|Van Der Laan,||Cooper||Pittsburgh, University of||10|
|Plage,||James||North Carolina State University||9|
|Clark,||Charlie||Ohio State University||9|
|Bowers,||Noah||North Carolina State University||9|
|Torok, Dominik||Mark||Wisconsin, University of, Madison||9|
|Korstanje,||Nyls||North Carolina State University||9|
|Linscheer,||Gio||Florida, University of||8|
|Brown,||Eric||Florida, University of||8|
|Puente Bustamante,||Andres||Texas A&M University||8|
|Unlu,||Baturalp||Georgia Institute of Technology||7|
|Izzo,||Giovanni||North Carolina State University||7|
|Laur,||Mason||Florida, University of||7|
|Brownstead,||Matt||Virginia, University of||7|
|Davis,||Wyatt||Michigan, University of||7|
|Callan,||Patrick||California, University of, Berkeley||6|
|Enyeart,||Alec||Texas, University of||6|
|Sartori,||Murilo||Louisville, University of||6|
|Gonzalez Pinero,||Joaquin||Florida, University of||6|
|Curtiss,||David||North Carolina State University||5.5|
|Schlicht,||David||Arizona State University||5|
|Jensen,||Matthew||California, University of, Berkeley||5|
|Epitropov,||Lyubomir||University of Tennessee||5|
|McCusker,||Max||Arizona State University||4.5|
|Dant,||Ross||North Carolina State University||4|
|Wilby,||Mason||Kentucky, University of||4|
|Laitarovsky,||Michael||South Carolina, University of, Columbia||4|
|Ng,||Wesley||Georgia, University of||3.5|
|Smith,||Julian||Florida, University of||3|
|Driggers,||Landon||University of Tennessee||3|
|Szabados,||Bence||Michigan, University of||2.5|
|Quach,||Alex||Ohio State University||2.5|
|Abruzzo,||Andrew||Georgia, University of||2|
|Bratanov,||Kaloyan||Texas A&M University||2|
|Feehery,||Colin||Southern Methodist University||2|
|Daigle,||Jared||Michigan, University of||2|
|Gogulski,||Ethan||Texas A&M University||2|
|Yanchev,||Yordan||Florida State University||1|
|Matheson,||Daniel||Arizona State University||1|
|Hoagland,||Jack||Notre Dame, University of||1|
|Hils,||Zach||Georgia, University of||1|
|Foster,||Jake||Texas, University of||1|
|Patton,||Ben||Missouri, University of||1|
|Piszczorowicz,||Bartosz||North Carolina State University||1|
|Espernberger,||Martin||University of Tennessee||1|
|Saka,||Berke||Georgia Institute of Technology||0.5|
Can someone tell me how the wvu swimmer made the meet cuz I can’t find where he swam 3:42. I’m genuinely curious.
Texas has a ceiling of 2nd and a floor of 5th with 3rd most likely behind Cal and FL. I think they sneak ahead of ASU and NCS.
Wild to think Ohio State beat Texas in a dual meet, was ranked 5th at one point (?), but then seemingly didn’t get it done when it counted. Only 4 qualifiers and slightly above average relays? I’ve read some posts on here about the staff changes at OSU being super positive, but a 17th place projection has to be a HUGE letdown for the Ohio folks.
we love the ohio state slander💀
It actually appears a real interesting battle for 5th will be brewing (TN, IN, TX, and whichever other Top 15 team comes in healthy, nails the relays, and hits the lucky 8th/16th spots in Prelims).
NC State always seems to be stuck at 4th during their best seasons.
Imagine if Finke, Smith, and Freeman had stayed for the season for the Gators. 😱
If those guys have stayed I doubt they have the scholarship money for Liendo.
Texas has not been the favorite to win the title and sure isn’t now, but it would be a terrible meet for them to finish below 3rd
For instance, all 4 relays other than 800 free will still finish top 8 despite being seeded much lower
To answer an earlier poster, I think Carson can go 21.0 in the back
That means you won’t win but you won’t finish 14th
I think they’ll need to hit everything right for their relays to perform this well.
8th last year in the 200 free relay was an 18.8 average split. Feel like that is about the ceiling in terms of time for them to go. Their fastest returning splits are an 18.6 is Corbeau and 18.7 in Krueger.
If you remove the legs from their 200 medley and add in a 21.0 and the respective split times that they have produced this year, they’ll be right around a 1:22 low. Which is right around 8th again.
I can see them replicating their 3:01 mid in the 400 medley pretty well this year. Which is about 5th.
400 free relay is going to… Read more »
So far there is not a single comment doubting ASU’s second place. Not only have they positioned themselves well, but they have done such a commanding job of it that the swim community pretty much has them as a lock for second. I don’t know my history but their rise from preseason rankings seems historical.
Most people (swimswam included had them 5th or 6th) I still think they finish behind Cal & UF, but if they do go preseason 6th to 2nd, I wouldn’t call that a historical rise.
Its almost not fair to prescore Texas’ times. They were still swimming fast to try to qualify people, but they could have won their conference if half their swims were randomly DQed, they are all in on NCAA. I’d expect their top tier guys that were going to qualify anyway to get a bigger bump than most of field. Who cares if they qualify 17th instead of 5th.
I know we live in an age where you dont need to only swim fast once a year anymore, (heck Leon is living proof with in-season NCAA records) but there is something to be said about peaking.
Well that is how prescoring works lol. It is based off the psych sheet.
Other than Jake foster and Caspar who do you expect to make huge jumps from the psych sheet? Who’s gonna go a 20.9 leading off the 200 medley relay for them?
Maybe ‘unfair’ was a bit of a stretch.
My point is just that I think Texas will outperform their seed times more consistently than the rest of the field.
If the betting line was for Texas to finish better or worse than 7th (their projected score), I’d take the better every day.
Agreed, they are more likely to “outperform their seed times more consistently than the rest,” but the problem is how far back the seed times put them.
Hobson isn’t seeded to score in the 500. Braden vines and coby Carozza aren’t seeded to score anything; I could see them snagging some B-final points. Enyeart could get into the 500 B-final. Caspar isnt seeded to score in the 2IM, and Krueger is seeded outside in the 100
Vines: 16th, 25th, 23rd. Would have to be near best times to score this year.
Carozza: 10th, 15th, 31st. He’s looked good this year. I think he’ll probably get 2 B final swims.
Enyeart: Think he could score in the 500, just never quite know with freshman. Could even get an A final. He looked good in the summer.
Hobson: 3rd, 12th, 16th. Think he’s a lock for an A in the 500. 200 free is so tight it’s tough to say he would be a guarantee A, but probably guaranteed final swim.
One thing to remember and think about is momentum. As the meet begins you have to think about the order of events. What if they win the 800 free relay and wake up and go 2/2 in the 500 and 1/2 in the IM and then Krueger go 18.8 in the 50. What place do they get from that start?
The 500 and 200 IM could easily happen, but Krueger probably isn’t going 18.8. He’s more likely to not score than go 18.8.
No one is rested for their conference meets, which is always laughable because most swim slowly ‘when rested’ at NCAAs. Some of the Texas bigtime swimmers haven’t been where they were last year so it will be interesting to see if they’re just off this year or they’ve been waiting for a big rest for NCAAs.
Texas finishing 7th? Only in the psych sheet world; real world: 1st or 2nd.
There’s that Texas energy we were waiting for.
i’m still waiting for the real nuclear take from Mike in Austin.
I don’t think the alums can save them this year.
You call it energy I call it arrogance