The NCAA Men’s and Women’s Swimming and Diving Committees will continue to discuss what restrictions – if any – should be placed on suits used for the 2010 NCAA championships at their July 26-29 meetings in Indianapolis.

In what has become one of the most intriguing issues in swimming’s history, the committees that govern the collegiate sport’s playing rules and oversee its championships have been thrust into the position of clarifying waters muddied by the proliferation of full-body, drag-diminished suits that have contributed to a rewriting of world records over the last 18 months.

“This is something we couldn’t have imagined as little as two years ago,” said Oakland Athletics Director Tracy Huth, who chairs the Division I swimming committee and oversees the session in which all three divisional committees convene to discuss playing rules.

Huth joins fellow committee members in figuring out a situation that has become even more complex now that FINA, the sport’s international governing body, has allowed more than 300 suits from about two dozen manufacturers to be used at next week’s world championships in Rome. That decision came only two months after the organization had considered imposing restrictions. FINA meets again in Rome and is expected to issue a ruling to take effect January 1, 2010.

That may or may not provide much guidance, though, for the collegiate community. While the NCAA committees will pay attention to what FINA decides, they will have to impose rules that extend throughout the whole collegiate swimming season, not just for January 1 and beyond.

If nothing else, Huth’s group will come to the July meeting in Indianapolis fortified with an entire pool of information. A representational subcommittee has been conducting regular conference calls about the suits, and Huth and his committee peers have had what he calls “productive dialogue” with an army of swimming constituents, particularly college coaches from all three divisions.

He said the coaching community for the most part craves parameters regarding the suits, though most understand the predicament the committees face in wanting to align rules with national and international standards as much as possible and still act in the college sport’s best interests.

“Our committees are entering this meeting determined to do what we think is best for intercollegiate swimming,” Huth said. “As long as we take that approach, I believe our constituencies will respect it. There may be those who disagree with whatever we decide, but we’ve had so much good dialogue with the coaches – and everyone understands the difficulty of the decision we have to make – so I think we can get through this and move on.”

Huth said most coaches would prefer restrictions if the committees can figure out a manageable approach, but if the techno suits end up being allowed, coaches will do what they can to equip their swimmers with what it takes to be competitive. Besides competitive equity, coaches from all three divisions also are worried about costs since the expensive suits can be used for only one or two meets before they wear out. But Huth said the issue is much broader than financial.

Other organizations are wrestling with the issue, too. USA Swimming Executive Director Chuck Wielgus indicated in a USA Today article that his national governing body may recommend to FINA that suits for men not extend above the navel or below the knees. Women’s suits could end at the shoulder and the knees.

Meanwhile, groups for pre-collegiate swimmers, such as the National High School Federation and the YMCA, are looking to the NCAA committees for guidance, since they typically follow NCAA rules.

Further complicating the matter is the suits’ effects on time standards and qualifying. “We can’t have people qualifying in one suit up to January and then another one after that,” Huth said. “That’s a point we have made clear with the coaches.”

Whatever the committees decide about the suits, it won’t be hasty or uniformed.

“Normally on NCAA sport committees, you have two or three conference calls a year, you go to the championships and you have an annual meeting, and everyone is happy to see each other,” Huth said. “In this case, I can’t even count the number of conference calls and impromptu meetings we’ve had since the suit issue emerged.

“All I know is that this is something that could have fractured us across the board in swimming in this country, but a lot of people have made a concerted effort to move collectively in the right direction. Does that mean we’re all going to make the same decisions regarding suits? I have no idea, but at least we’re all looking at the issue with as much information and dialogue with the right entities as we possibly can.”

What people are saying about the suits

“As swimmers, our job is to show up in the best suit out there. We’re not going to be in a Camaro if the competition is going to be in a Ferrari. It’s FINA’s job to restrict the suits.” – U.S. Olympian Eric Shanteau, Washington Post	“I’m not a fan of the suit, but once somebody has it, it’s just like having a big driver in golf – once the technology is out there, you had better go out and match your competition or you’ll fall behind.” –  Drury men’s and women’s coach Brian Reynolds, The NCAA News	“The rise in suits has been more destructive than anything the sport has seen in the last 50 years, including doping.” –  American Swimming Coaches Association Executive Director John Leonard, Washington Post	“The sad part is now it’s about what suit you’re wearing, what technology you have, not necessarily the training or the athlete or the techniques. You have to qualify everything with what suit they’re wearing.” –  Michael Phelps’ coach Bob Bowman, USA Today