By Benny Liang, Swimming World College Intern
With a majority of midseason invites taking place around the Thanksgiving weekend, here’s a look at how things are shaping up this season for Division 1 women. The Texas Invite and Georgia Fall Invite have yet to take place meaning several teams will not be ranked with tapered times. However, considering the dominance of the Stanford women at this point, those meets will likely not have a large impact on this analysis.
Photo Courtesy: Reagan Lunn/Georgia Tech Athletics
At the 2016 NCAA Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships, the Georgia Bulldogs outlasted out a strong showing from the Stanford Cardinal by a margin of 414 to 395. The Bulldogs pulled in big points from seniors Hali Flickinger and Brittany MacLean, along with junior Olivia Smoliga. Flickinger and MacLean were deadly in the middle distance freestyles and contributed heavily in relays. Smoliga took both of the sprint freestyles in record time, also winning the B-final of the 100 back in a time that would have taken second overall.
This year, the scales look to shift in the Cardinal’s favor. With three Olympic medalists (Katie Ledecky, Simone Manuel and Lia Neal) along with returning NCAA champions Ella Eastin, Ally Howe and Janet Hu, the Cardinal will be very tough to beat.
Photo Courtesy: Peter H. Bick
This analysis may as well be called “What Events Will Stanford Not Win at NCAA’s?”
Excluding the breaststrokes, where Stanford does not have a swimmer ranked in the top 20 nationally, there are only three events where Stanford is not ranked first. They are the 50 and 100 freestyles, and 200 medley relay. The Cardinal has the nation’s second best time in each of those events. The combined margin separating Stanford from the top time in these three races is a tenth of a second. You read that right, a tenth.
Multiple World-Record holder Ledecky is the top ranked swimmer from the 500 up. The queen of distance swimming has already broken numerous records this season. She has a six second lead in the 500 (4:26.46) over 2016 NCAA champion Leah Smith (4:32.52) and is ten seconds faster than Yirong Bi (4:37.62) of Michigan. Ledecky (15:03.92) heads the mile over Hannah Moore (16:00.23) of NC State by almost a minute. It’s safe to say that we can expect a Stanford victory in these events come March.
Olympic champion Manuel (1:41.90) holds the top ranked time in the 200 free over teammate Ledecky (1:42.16), followed by Michigan’s Siobhan Haughey (1:42.93). Notably, both Manuel and Ledecky have gone faster than the winning time from last years championships. MacLean, the 2016 champion, has graduated but Louisville’s runner-up Mallory Comerford (1:43.13) and third place finisher Neal (1:44.87) return, currently standing at fifth and ninth, respectively.
Photo Courtesy: Peter H. Bick
Louisville’s Comerford (47.36) leads the 100 free rankings with Cardinal’s Manuel (47.37) and Neal (47.70) hot on her heels. Jacqueline Keire (47.99) of the Cincinnati Bearcats represents the fourth and final swimmer to crack 48 so far. 2016 champion Smoliga has yet to swim her midseason meet, and is currently unranked.
Zhesi Li (21.70) of Ohio State holds a narrow advantage over Manuel (21.78) in the 50 free. First and second place finishers at the 2016 Championships, Smoliga and Farida Osman also return to take their last shots at a title in the splash-n-dash their senior year. Smoliga is the NCAA record holder, so the challenge of Manuel won’t be taken lightly.
Three girls take the top four spots the backstroke rankings: Hu of Stanford, Hannah Stevens of Mizzou and Asia Seidt of Kentucky. Howe is currently the only sub-51 100 backstroker and is followed by Hu (51.01) and Stevens (51.18). Freshman Seidt (51.50) leads an impressive Wildcat backstroke group. Don’t sleep on Smoliga, she swam the second fastest 100 at last year’s championships. She is also riding a huge wave of momentum from this summer that saw her win the 100 back at Trials (59.02) and take sixth at Rio (58.95).
Hu (1:50.69) takes over the longer backstroke race pursued by Seidt (1:51.18) and Stevens (1:51.73). Two other Kentucky women are ranked in the top eight along with Seidt: defending champion Danielle Galyer is ranked fourth (1:52.12) and Bridgette Alexander sits seventh (1:52.84).
Photo Courtesy: Peter H. Bick
Indiana superstar Lilly King (57.30) rules the 100 breaststroke. She won gold in Rio in this event in Olympic record time, so this will be her race to lose. The next fastest swimmer, Andrea Cottrell of Louisville, is over a second and a half behind King at 58.85. King and Cottrell are the only two to crack 59 so far, with the third ranked swimmer Jorie Caneta of Texas A&M at 59.38. King also leads the 200 breast rankings, though not by as much. In 2:05.64, King barely edges out Kierra Smith of Minnesota (2:05.83). King and Smith have a fair lead over the rest of the country, with another Aggie, Ashley McGregor, taking third in 2:07.16.
The 100 fly shapes up to be a much closer race than the breaststrokes. The top seven are separated by less than a second anda Stanford swimmer tops the list. Hu (51.05) is followed by Aggie Sarah Gibson (51.37) and Buckeye Li (51.42). Stanford also owns the top time in the 200 fly, this time by Eastin who at last years NCAA’s ran out of room to chase down Louisville’s Kelsi Worrell to take second. Eastin (1:52.62) is nearly two seconds faster than Gibson (1:54.59) and Megan Kingsley (1:54.90) of Georgia.
Triple threat Eastin also headlines both of the IM races. She won both of the races last year and looks to repeat again. Her time of 1:54.06 puts her over a second ahead of backstroke specialist Seidt (1:55.33) and Longhorn Madisyn Cox (1:55.87). Eastin (4:00.36) inches past teammate Ledecky (4:00.65) in the longer IM race. Breaststroker Bethany Galat (4:04.36) of Texas A&M sits in third. With the 200 free and 400 IM taking place the same session at NCAA’s, Ledecky may take a shot at the 400 IM to dodge a packed field in the 200 free and let teammates Manuel, Neal and Katie Drabot do some damage this spring.
Photo Courtesy: Stanford Athletics
Stanford leads all three of the freestyle relays, beating out North Carolina (1:28.19) and NC State (1:29.01) in the 200, and dominating Minnesota and Louisville in the longer races. The Cardinal’s time in the 200 (1:27.72) would have taken fifth at the 2016 championships. A win this year is possible; Stanford returns all members of its relay which took first but was disqualified for a false start on the final leg. California and Georgia also return all members of their relays.
In the 400 free relay Stanford (3:12.55) leads Minnesota (3:13.29) and NC State (3:13.35). University of Southern California will be tough to beat with all four members of their winning team last year returning. They swam a time of 3:09.69. However, the addition of Manuel gives a two second boost to the Stanford squad, putting them in title contention for this race.
Stanford’s top four 200 freestylers are currently ranked top 11 in the nation. It’s no wonder that they (6:55.54) lead Minnesota (7:00.40) and Michigan (7:03.07) by nearly five seconds. Swapping Ledecky and Manuel into last years relay which took sixth, Stanford would have gone 6:51.29 (not counting relay exchanges) and beat Georgia, who won in 6:51.80.
Louisville (1:36.52) owns the top spot in the 200 medley relay, just one one-hundredth ahead of Stanford (1:36.53). This is due to the loss of Stanford breaststroker Sarah Haase to graduation, and the return of Louisville breaststroker Cottrell. Though the Cardinal does not have a solid second leg in the medleys, they do have three of the fastest legs in the country with top-flight Howe, Hu and Manuel. Not to be overlooked NC State (1:36.80) is within striking distance.
The Cardinal takes the reins back in the 400 medley, squeaking past Minnesota 3:29.63 to 3:29.65. Louisville fades to third, showing their weakness in the absence of a top-15 backstroker or flyer.
The 2017 Women’s NCAA Swimming and Diving Championships take place March 16th-18th at the Indiana University Natatorium.
All commentaries are the opinion of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Swimming World Magazine nor its staff.