National Collegiate Athletic Association

NCAA News Archive - 2010

back to 2010 | Back to NCAA News Archive Index

May 6, 2010 1:08:23 PM

Thursday's announcement that the Divisions I, II and III Men's and Women's Swimming and Diving Championships would be conducted in Indianapolis twice apiece over a six-year period contains an important component.

While the Divisions II and III championships will continue on as combined men's and women's meets held over the course of four days, Division I is maintaining its tradition of conducting each gender's three-day meet separately in back-to-back weeks.

The Division I women's and men's championships are in Indianapolis March 21-23 and March 28-30, 2013; and March 16-18 and 23-25, 2017. The women are at Texas next year, while the men's meet is at Minnesota. Sites for 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2016 have not been finalized (though a recommendation for 2012 has been forwarded to the Division I Championships/Sports Management Cabinet).

Whether to continue maintaining separate meets for each gender is an evergreen issue for Division I swimming stakeholders, but to date, the Division I Men's and Women's Swimming and Diving Committee has not found a rationale compelling enough to recommend a change.

Committee chair Tracy Huth, the athletics director at Oakland University, said there are merits to a combined meet, but so far the committee has been asked only to review whether such an event is logistically feasible. While it is, he said, the resulting size of a combined meet (the championships accommodate 270 men and 320 women) would severely limit the number of facilities capable of hosting.

"While it might be a potentially great idea to combine the two meets into one, it raises a number of issues, not the least of which is the limit on facilities," Huth said, noting that the IU Natatorium in Indianapolis is among the few in the country that could accommodate that large of a field.

Another practical concern is how a combined meet in Division I would accommodate diving. Because the Division I championships incorporate a platform diving event in addition to the one- and three-meter competitions that the Divisions II and III formats provide, it could require a longer meet.

"The four-day meets at the Divisions II and III level work well for the four diving events in those meets because you can conduct one event per day," Huth said. "But to accommodate six diving events during a combined Division I meet, considering the number of competitors and the time it would take to fit all the events in and still maintain quality – do we extend past four days? Do we consider a five- or six-day meet? That then begs the question of whether it makes economic sense and whether it causes more missed class time."

But those who favor a combined approach cite a few logistical benefits as well, such as travel efficiencies for teams with competitors in both championships and the economies of scale in accommodations that would be available with a larger field.

Beyond the practicality of a combined meet, though, the committee has studied whether it would add value to the student-athlete experience.

Proponents of a combined meet say it would add value because the entire nation would be focused on a premier meet in a contained window rather than on two separate meets in consecutive weeks. They believe the one event would add promotional benefits and create more media opportunities.

Huth said, though, that it might be unrealistic to expect huge media gains given the timing of the swimming championships (currently in the middle of the Division I men's and women's basketball championships).

Others believe the promotional benefits are greater with separate championships rather than a combined approach, since each gender's meet has unique characteristics.

Committee members also point out that a combined event might overshadow the experience for smaller teams. While the separate championships fields already run the gamut of a few 18-competitor squads to teams with just one or two competitors, that gap would be even more pronounced in a combined event.

"Would the quality of the experience for the smaller teams be maintained if there were even larger contingents from a few schools at the combined meet?" Huth said. "This is about the individual student-athletes and the experience – we're really trying to give consideration to every competitor that will be at our championships."

To date, Huth said, there hasn't been a groundswell from Division I coaches to combine the meets that have been held separately ever since the women's championship was established in 1982. He noted, though, that the College Swimming Coaches Association of America is asking its Division I members whether they would be interested in pursuing that route.

Huth said an overwhelming number of coaches wanting a combined event would affect the committee's thinking if the group was asked to consider a formal proposal, but that its evaluation would still have to be on the merits.

"Whether it's with playing rules, championship format or site selection, we've tried to listen to our constituents and within reason accommodate their concerns," he said. "If there were to suddenly be overwhelming support for a combined championship, then the committee would have to seriously consider that proposal and make a decision based on the rationale.

"To date, we have not seen a compelling rationale for us to recommend to the Championships Cabinet that we believe a combined championship is the way to go."