Cal was really really good this weekend. As the cliche goes: Texas didn’t lose the meet, Cal won it. The Texas men scored 475 points, 26 points more than they scored to win the meet last year. Cal scored 560, the 9th most points any men’s team has ever scored at NCAA’s and the most by any team at this meet since 2004. There have only been 4 previous instances of a team scoring at least 475 points and failing to win the title.
Most points ever at NCAA’s
Year
School
Points
1
2004
Auburn
634
2
1992
Stanford
632
3
2003
Auburn
609.5
4
1998
Stanford
599
5
2001
Texas
597.5
6
1994
Stanford
566.5
7
2007
Auburn
566
8
1995
Michigan
561
9
2019
California
560
10
2017
Texas
542
Cal led the scored psych sheet going into the meet and picked up an absolutely ridiculous 158 points over their seeds. Harvard gained the next most points over their seeds with a gain of 83. Texas were next with a gain of 80. Texas’s gain of 80 is a very solid performance, but was still 78 fewer than Cal. The Longhorns didn’t choke, they just ran into a buzz saw.
The engine of the Cal buzz saw was their sophomores who scored 178 individual points, the most of any class at the meet. Next best were Indiana’s seniors who scored 161.
A sophomore class leading the way is a bit surprising at a meet so dominated by upperclassmen. In total, freshmen scored 317 individual points, sophomores scored 606.5, juniors scored 567.5, and seniors scored 989.
Another thing impressive about the Cal sophomore’s performance is how much they improved since last year. Last year as freshmen they scored 87.5 points. They more than doubled that total this year. By comparison the highest scoring freshmen class last year were the Texas freshmen who scored 104 individual points. This year as sophomores, that group scored 69 points.
The performance of each team’s sophomores helps explain how Texas had a returning individual points advantage this year and the highest scoring freshman class at the meet (46 points, Florida were 2nd with 41) and lost. Texas’s other two returning classes were better than last year. Their seniors scored 125 (108 last year) and their juniors scored 61 (39 last year). However, Cal’s upperclassmen also jumped a lot. Cal’s juniors scored 72 after scoring 34 last year, more than doubling their points, and the Cal seniors scored 109 after scoring 97 last year.
Texas scored the most diving points with 84. Tennessee and Miami had the next most with 62 each.
The biggest under performance vs seed came from Michigan. The Wolverines scored 135 points fewer than they were seeded to.
Cal return 279 individual points, the most of any team by a wide margin. Texas are next with 176. Michigan return the 3rd most with 91 followed by Florida with 80.
Cal scored in every single swimming event. The highest single event point total was Texas’s 50 points in the 200 back.
By Swimulator power points, the best individual event swim of the meet was Ian Finnerty‘s 49.85 100 breast. Dean Farris’s 800 free lead off of 1:29.15 was the best including relay splits.
There is a lot of data below a quick table of contents: Final Scores, Individual Scores by Class, Event Scores, and an Individual Breakdown with final times, places, and scores for every swimmer at the meet sorted by team.
Final Scores
School
Final Score
Swim Points
Dive Points
Psych Points
Swim vs Psych Diff
1
California
560
560
0
402
158
2
Texas
475
391
84
311
80
3
Indiana
385.5
351.5
34
354
-2.5
4
NC State
307
307
0
253
54
5
Louisville
212
212
0
189
23
6
Florida
164
164
0
245
-81
7
Alabama
142
142
0
192.5
-50.5
8
Harvard
132
132
0
49
83
9
Ohio State
124
102
22
130
-28
10
Virginia
106
106
0
82
24
11
Tennessee
105
43
62
133
-90
11
Missouri
105
102
3
151.5
-49.5
13
Michigan
99
99
0
234
-135
14
Florida St
97
94
3
111.5
-17.5
15
Stanford
96
82
14
60
22
16
Arizona
95
95
0
81
14
17
TA&M
93
67
26
64
3
18
Georgia
86
86
0
66.5
19.5
19
Minnesota
84
79
5
65.5
13.5
20
Southern Cali
81
81
0
70
11
21
Arizona St
75.5
63.5
12
52.5
11
22
Miami
62
0
62
0
0
23
Purdue
51
22
29
11
11
24
Georgia Tech
45
45
0
40
5
25
Kentucky
26
4
22
0
4
26
LSU
25
0
25
0
0
27
South Carolina
21
17
4
39
-22
28
Penn
18
18
0
13
5
29
Penn St
17
0
17
0
0
29
Hawaii
17
17
0
6
11
29
Duke
17
0
17
0
0
32
Grand Canyon
16
16
0
19
-3
33
Columbia
14
0
14
0
0
33
Towson
14
14
0
14
0
35
Virginia Tech
11
11
0
27
-16
36
Notre Dame
7
7
0
17
-10
36
Denver
7
7
0
5
2
36
Missouri St.
7
7
0
0
7
36
Wisconsin
7
7
0
16.5
-9.5
40
Auburn
6
6
0
24
-18
40
Princeton
6
6
0
5
1
42
IUPUI
4
0
4
0
0
42
Navy
4
0
4
0
0
44
UNC
2
0
2
0
0
45
Pittsburgh
0
0
0
10.5
-10.5
45
Brigham Young
0
0
0
8
-8
45
Utah
0
0
0
7
-7
45
UCSB
0
0
0
0
0
45
West Virginia
0
0
0
0
0
45
East Carolina
0
0
0
0
0
Individual Scores by Year
California
Texas
Indiana
NC State
Louisville
Florida
Alabama
Harvard
Ohio State
Virginia
FR
29
46
38
9
6
41
0
0
3
4
SO
178
69
27
6
55
13
0
0
39
0
JR
72
61
11.5
55
3
26
5
53
14
5
SR
109
125
161
73
26
0
35
11
7
51
Returning
279
176
76.5
70
64
80
5
53
56
9
Missouri
Tennessee
Michigan
Florida St
Stanford
Arizona
TA&M
Georgia
Minnesota
Southern Cali
FR
0
13
7
0
19
22
10
0
33
3
SO
0
0
24
3
14
20
16
27
0
0
JR
0
1
60
0
21
4
12
46
0
4
SR
36
51
0
14
34
11
27
11
37
20
Returning
0
14
91
3
54
46
38
73
33
7
Arizona St
Miami
Purdue
Georgia Tech
Kentucky
LSU
South Carolina
Penn
Hawaii
Duke
FR
0
0
13
0
6
0
4
0
0
0
SO
6.5
15
18
42
0
0
0
0
0
0
JR
24
17
0
0
0
25
1
0
17
11
SR
5
30
0
1
16
0
16
18
0
6
Returning
30.5
32
31
42
6
25
5
0
17
11
Penn State
Grand Canyon
Towson
Columbia
Virginia Tech
Denver
Missouri St
Wisconsin
Notre Dame
Princeton
FR
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
6
SO
0
0
0
14
6
7
0
0
7
0
JR
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
SR
17
16
14
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
Returning
0
0
0
14
11
7
0
7
7
6
Auburn
Navy
IUPUI
UNC
FR
0
0
0
0
SO
0
0
0
0
JR
6
4
0
2
SR
0
0
4
0
Returning
6
4
0
2
Points in Each Event
What each team scored in each event
800 Free Relay
200 Free Relay
500 Free
200 IM
50 Free
1 mtr Diving
400 Medley Relay
400 IM
100 Fly
200 Free
100 Breast
100 Back
3 mtr Diving
200 Medley Relay
1650 Free
200 Back
100 Free
200 Breast
200 Fly
Platform Diving
400 Free Relay
California
32
40
26
35
45
0
34
47
32
20
15
12
0
34
31
30
24
35
36
0
32
Texas
40
32
20
17
20
27
32
0
0
48
6
29
28
30
0
50
25
0
2
29
40
Indiana
30
30
0
27
14
14
40
0
20
23.5
34
7
20
18
24
0
21
16
17
0
30
NC State
34
34
5
17
16
0
30
0
21
3
0
23
0
32
7
15
16
0
20
0
34
Louisville
26
14
0
0
3
0
28
3
9
13
12
13
0
28
13
6
0
3
15
0
26
Florida
28
12
3
11
0
0
22
13
15
9
0
9
0
14
5
15
0
0
0
0
8
Alabama
0
26
0
0
16
0
18
0
0
0
5
5
0
40
0
0
14
0
0
0
18
Harvard
24
22
11
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
8
0
0
20
0
0
0
14
Ohio State
13
24
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
9
22
24
Virginia
22
0
4
0
0
0
12
21
4
0
0
3
0
12
14
0
0
0
14
0
0
Missouri
13
18
0
0
4
1
24
0
0
11
11
0
2
4
0
0
7
0
0
0
10
Tennessee
0
0
0
0
0
22
8
0
0
0
0
0
26
26
0
1
2
0
0
14
6
Michigan
6
0
22
0
2
0
0
16
16
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
15
0
0
2
Florida St
0
28
0
0
6
3
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
24
0
0
3
0
0
0
28
Stanford
4
4
0
14
0
0
0
25
0
0
9
0
13
0
21
0
0
5
0
1
0
Arizona
10
8
16
2
0
0
6
13
11
4
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
11
0
0
12
TA&M
8
10
12
4
0
16
4
0
0
1
0
0
10
6
0
0
0
12
10
0
0
Georgia
0
0
14
5
0
0
2
0
14
0
0
11
0
0
13
5
0
11
11
0
0
Minnesota
0
0
0
0
15
0
14
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
17
17
0
5
0
Southern Cali
0
6
0
0
0
0
26
0
0
0
21
0
0
22
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
Arizona St
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6.5
0
6
6
0
0
11
0
0
0
6
22
Miami
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
32
0
Purdue
0
0
0
0
0
7
10
0
0
0
2
0
9
10
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
Georgia Tech
2
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
1
0
0
0
0
0
15
1
0
0
Kentucky
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
4
LSU
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
South Carolina
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
Penn
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Hawaii
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
12
0
2
0
0
0
Duke
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Penn State
0
0
0
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Grand Canyon
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Towson
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
0
Columbia
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Virginia Tech
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
Denver
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
Missouri St
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Wisconsin
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
Notre Dame
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
Princeton
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Auburn
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Navy
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
IUPUI
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
UNC
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
Individual Breakdown
Power are Swimulator power points. Those are a way to quantify time quality independent of what event the time is from. Includes only final times and final dive scores.
Maybe one of my all-time favorite articles here on Swimswam! Thank you for this info….this swim nerd loves stats, numbers, class-level points, projections, what just happened by-the-numbers, what might happen by-the-numbers, etc. Cal had a crazy amazing meet, and that sophomore class was next to perfect. Mefford could probably add to his points next year, I’m thinking. I also think Texas’s freshman class will be bumping those points up big time next year, perhaps akin to Cal’s sophomore class this year? All in all, fun to read the numbers. Thank you for this article! A very interesting read to scour over. Congrats to all swimmers at the meet, especially the seniors!
Historical Precedent
5 years ago
I’d be interested to see if anyone has taken all of the times from finals of all the winning teams (or as far back as saved) and drawn out a meet and results from that. It’d be interesting to see how the winning teams over the years compare against each other. Andrew, have you or anyone at swimswam done this or talked about doing this type of analysis?
h2olover
5 years ago
Dave Durden will need to find a leader to replace Andrew Seliskar who I suspect played a major role in goal setting and team discipline that underscored the Bear’s amazing performance in Austin.
Prob MI women this year compared to MI mens team this year.
CalBear88
5 years ago
I would be curious to see what individual scored the most points above psych sheet. I have a feeling that Grieshop would be pretty high.
Mikeh
5 years ago
#longhornforever but it’s good to see Andrew Seliskar dominating, and meeting his potential. Looking forward to his professional years, continuing with Tram USA.
googoodoll
5 years ago
Would love to see actual “percentage of points” scored above or below psych sheet
Biggest underperformer per heat sheet – Michigan. Really sad to see them finish so far down. Is this just a really young team or something else went wrong??
Braden Keith is the Editor-in-Chief and a co-founder/co-owner of SwimSwam.com.
He first got his feet wet by building The Swimmers' Circle beginning in January 2010, and now comes to SwimSwam to use that experience and help build a new leader in the sport of swimming.
Aside from his life on the InterWet, …
Maybe one of my all-time favorite articles here on Swimswam! Thank you for this info….this swim nerd loves stats, numbers, class-level points, projections, what just happened by-the-numbers, what might happen by-the-numbers, etc. Cal had a crazy amazing meet, and that sophomore class was next to perfect. Mefford could probably add to his points next year, I’m thinking. I also think Texas’s freshman class will be bumping those points up big time next year, perhaps akin to Cal’s sophomore class this year? All in all, fun to read the numbers. Thank you for this article! A very interesting read to scour over. Congrats to all swimmers at the meet, especially the seniors!
I’d be interested to see if anyone has taken all of the times from finals of all the winning teams (or as far back as saved) and drawn out a meet and results from that. It’d be interesting to see how the winning teams over the years compare against each other. Andrew, have you or anyone at swimswam done this or talked about doing this type of analysis?
Dave Durden will need to find a leader to replace Andrew Seliskar who I suspect played a major role in goal setting and team discipline that underscored the Bear’s amazing performance in Austin.
Daniel Carr, Bryce Mefford are good examples even though they’re not seniors next year.
A lot of teams losing big senior classes. Texas, Indiana, NC State, Alabama, Virginia and others
btw, what has been biggest difference between mens and womens teams points in one year…..
Prob MI women this year compared to MI mens team this year.
I would be curious to see what individual scored the most points above psych sheet. I have a feeling that Grieshop would be pretty high.
#longhornforever but it’s good to see Andrew Seliskar dominating, and meeting his potential. Looking forward to his professional years, continuing with Tram USA.
Would love to see actual “percentage of points” scored above or below psych sheet
Biggest underperformer per heat sheet – Michigan. Really sad to see them finish so far down. Is this just a really young team or something else went wrong??