Division I members of the Men's and Women's Swimming and Diving Committee reversed their stance on a policy the committee has employed during the last two Olympic years to generate publicity for the sport and accommodate international swimming concerns.

Members at the committee's recent annual meeting voted to suspend a previous format exception that called for the Division I Men's and Women's Swimming and Diving Championships to be conducted in short-course meters during Olympic years. That means the 2008 championships will be held in the traditional short-course yards format.

The latest action ends, for now at least, years of discussion about future formats. Six years ago, the committee agreed to conduct the Division I Men's and Women's Swimming and Diving Championships in 2000 and 2004, years in which Olympic competition also was staged, in short-course meters instead of short-course yards. At the time the decision was made, committee members believed the change would spur additional publicity for the NCAA meets and allow Olympic hopefuls the chance to post times in the NCAA meet that would equate with the meters format used in similar international competitions. The publicity has not been realized, however. In the 2004 men's and women's meets in fact, more than a dozen world records were set without a spike in coverage.

"The men's meet was in New York, the media capitol of the world, and there was nothing more than we had before," said committee Chair John Lyons, an associate athletics director at La Salle University. "We don't feel short-course meters has promoted the sport any differently than our usual yards format."

Also, while the meters format was a match during Olympic years, the length of the course was not. Olympic competition is conducted in long-course meters, and while there was some discussion among NCAA members to propose going that route, most coaches agreed that the change would put too much stress on facilities built to accommodate short-course meets.

With three options on the table, then, a survey taken at the 2005 men's and women's meet showed a majority of coaches reaffirming their preference for short-course yards. "I wouldn't say it was 100 percent," Lyons said, "but more people wanted to stay at yards rather than go back to short-course meters or move to long-course meters. And interestingly, those who wanted to stay at yards were passionate about why."

Lyons said those reasons primarily were that the NCAA meet is unique; it is one of the fastest, if not the fastest, meetsin the world; and the short-course yards times resonate more with the American swimming community. While there are those who say it's more important to have times that resonate with the international side of the sport, the committee at least believes that for now is a minority opinion.

In that vein, Lyons emphasized that the move to suspend the short-course meters format in no way strains the relationship between NCAA swimming and USA Swimming, the sport's national governing body. In fact, Lyons said, if anything, the two groups are more closely bonded than ever before. Lyons said the NCAA committee's decision to follow four major stroke rules changes adopted by the international governing body FINA (see story in the August 15 NCAA News) was far more meaningful to the international swimming community than the format of the NCAA meet.

"Staying with short-course yards doesn't mean we're breaking away from anyone," Lyons said.

'Floating' relay cap

Another big discussion item for the Division I committee was how to strengthen the competitiveness of the championship field through the use of relays. Because of competitive caps on the men's and women's fields (235 and 281, respectively), committee members have employed a relay cap as well (12 for the men's championships and 13 for the women's). The problem, according to the committee, is that the relay cap forces four vacant slots in each relay event to be filled by institutions already at the meet. In some cases, those teams aren't as fast as others that have posted qualifying times but were left out of the meet because of the cap.

To help remedy the situation, the committee is proposing a "floating" relay cap for the 2006 championships and beyond. The floating cap will move between a minimum of 12 (13 for women) and a maximum of 16, based on the number of individuals invited to the meet in each event each year. While the intent is to invite more relay teams to the meet, committee members agreed that such invitations should not come at the expense of highly qualified individual swimmers.

Lyons said an increase in relay teams makes for a more competitive championship in that it prevents teams that otherwise wouldn't have an entry into a relay event from accumulating "free points."

In other action, the committee recommended a change in the way championship diving competition is judged. The committee is proposing that seven judges not affiliated with participating teams be hired to score the diving competition in championships beginning in 2007. Currently, the judging panel is composed of coaches from teams already at the championships.

Committee members want an external panel of judges to add objectivity to the event and benefit the student-athlete experience. They believe the change would not only produce more objective scoring, it also would allow coaches to spend more time coaching their student-athletes than judging competition.

Other highlights

Division I Men's and Women's Swimming and Diving Committee
July 27-28/Indianapolis

• Noted and agreed to follow FINA changes in diving formats that call for championships competition to be composed of six dives for men and five for women. All dives are optional and unlimited. The way the competition is judged also has changed in that judges will aggregate the middle three of seven scores (the two high and low scores will be dropped).

• Voted to require fields at last-chance meets to be composed of four teams of the same gender to be considered for qualifying purposes. Committee members noted that a bona fide competition is defined as including two teams of the same gender, but because of the difficulty in monitoring the legitimacy of last-chance meets in recent years, the committee felt it was necessary to impose a stricter standard. Also, beginning in 2007, for relay events at last-chance meets to be considered for qualifying purposes, electronic take-off pads must be used.

• Voted to create a system for teams to order tickets in which the host determines a deadline for orders. Orders received by the deadline will be placed into a drawing, while subsequent orders will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis.

• Supported the development of a times database that would be populated by host institutions posting results after a meet. Committee members discussed the possibility of the database being administered by an outside entity.