By James Sutherland on SwimSwam
2026 NCAA Division I Women’s Swimming and Diving Championships
Wednesday, March 18 – Saturday, March 21, 2026 McAuley Aquatic Center, Atlanta, GA Championship Central Preview Index Psych Sheet Live ResultsThe 2026 Women’s NCAA Championships came to a close last weekend with the Virginia Cavaliers rolling to their sixth consecutive national title, marking the longest streak ever in the sport.
Virginia scored a whopping 589 points, their highest total during the six-year title run, with 12 different swimmers scoring double-digit points and eight women combining to sweep all five relays on the schedule.
The Cavaliers’ win came as expected—they sat atop every edition of the SwimSwam Power Rankings this season—but behind them, there were fierce battles for spots in the team standings that came right down to the wire.
2025-26 Women’s NCAA Power Rankings:
Early-season Pre-invites Post-invites Pre-conferences Final editionStanford pulled off a runner-up finish after placing 2nd in the meet-ending 400 free relay, holding off Texas, which trailed the Cardinal by just two points entering the event and ended up four back in 3rd.
Cal, sitting 6th entering the final day and 41.5 points back of 4th-place Tennessee, clawed their way up to 4th by the end of the meet with 303 points, edging out the Lady Vols (301.5) and Michigan (296).
Final Team Standings – Top 10
Virginia — 589 Stanford — 380.5 Texas — 376.5 California — 303 Tennessee — 301.5 Michigan — 296 Indiana — 258 Louisville — 201.5 NC State — 196.5 Florida — 125.5Below, we’ll be taking a look at how the team standings shook out compared to our final predictions from the SwimSwam Power Rankings.
2026 WOMEN’S NCAA RESULTS VERSUS SWIMSWAM PICKS
Finish Team Final Power Ranking Difference 1 Virginia 1 – 2 Stanford 2 – 3 Texas 4 ↑1 4 Cal 5 ↑1 5 Tennessee 6 ↑1 6 Michigan 3 ↓3 7 Indiana 8 ↑1 8 Louisville 6 ↓2 9 NC State 9 – 10 Florida 13 ↑3 11 Alabama 12 ↑1 12 Ohio State 10 ↓2 13 Wisconsin 16 ↑3 14 USC 11 ↓3 15 Georgia 14 ↓1 16 Pitt 18 ↑2 16 Minnesota NR + 18 Miami (FL) 21 ↑3 19 South Carolina HM + 20 UCLA 23 ↑3 21 Duke 15 ↓6 21 Purdue 19 ↓2 21 LSU 17 ↓4 24 UNC NR + 25 Kansas 22 ↓3 25 Auburn 20 ↓5WHAT WE GOT RIGHT
We hit the top two correctly, though it was close. Virginia winning the title was a no-brainer, and despite Stanford being the unanimous pick to place 2nd from SwimSwam writers, they only narrowly escaped with the runner-up spot, inching by Texas by four points. The top nine teams in the standings were picked correctly, though only Virginia, Stanford and NC State were in the right positions. The Wolfpack placed 9th.WHAT WE GOT WRONG – TOP 10
Texas, Cal and Tennessee were picked in the right order, just one spot too low. That’s because Michigan finished 3rd in the final edition of the power rankings after *checks notes* all but one writer ballot picked them to finish there. The Longhorns were wildly underrated, placing 3rd and nearly upsetting Stanford for 2nd, while Cal’s late-meet push elevated them to 4th and Tennessee slotted in at 5th. For Michigan, they were seeded to score 334.5 swimming points, but only ended up scoring 285, adding in 11 diving points to finish with 296. As a result, they placed 6th in the team race. Louisville, which tied with Tennessee for the #6 spot in the power rankings, ended up back in 8th place, while Indiana moved up one spot, from 8th to 7th. The Cardinals scored 54 points fewer than they were seeded to, while the Lady Vols were only 8.5 points shy of their seeded total. Florida was another underrated team in the power rankings. Selected to finish 13th, the Gators placed 10th with 125.5 points, including 26 from diving. Their 99.5 swimming points was 16 more than they were seeded to score (83.5). We picked Ohio State to crack the top 10, but they ended up falling to 12th, 38.5 points back of 10th-place Florida. The Buckeyes were seeded for 84.5 swimming points and only ended up with 62. They also picked up 25 diving points.OTHER SURPRISES
Along with Florida, the other three teams that moved up three spots from where they were picked were Wisconsin, Miami (FL) and UCLA. The Badgers were predicted to finish 16th but ended up in 13th, despite the fact that they essentially matched their psych sheet points, scoring 70.5 after being seeded for 72. The Hurricanes scored all of their 48 points in diving, which earned them 18th place after they picked to finish 21st. The Bruins, seeded to score 29 swimming points, finished with 32 and added seven in diving to slot into 20th place after being picked 23rd. Rosie Murphy, seeded for 19 points, scored 28 after making a pair of finals in the 200 and 400 IM while also scoring in the 200 back. The biggest dropper (among teams that finished in the top 25) was Duke, which was predicted to place 15th but fell into a tie for 21st. The Blue Devils ranked 16th in psych sheet scoring with 56.5 points, and finished with just 35. Also falling big were Auburn, LSU, USC, UCLA and Kansas. Auburn was picked 20th, and despite scoring 11 diving points, they ended up 25th with just 14 swimming points (all from relays). LSU was seeded for 50 points and ended up with 35, resulting in them falling from 17th to 21st, while USC was predicted to finish 11th and ended up 14th after scoring 9.5 points fewer than their seed. Kansas diver Shiyun Lai did the exact same thing she did last year, scoring 25 points on her own to give the Jayhawks a 25th-place finish in the standings, though we picked them to move up to 22nd.MOVING UP & MOVING OUT
Three teams cracked the top 25 that we didn’t predict to: Minnesota, South Carolina and UNC. The Golden Gophers tied for 16th with 55 points after divers Elna Widerstrom (28) and Viviana del Angel (21) combined for 49. The team wasn’t seeded to score any swimming points, but Katie McCarthy chipped in six after placing 11th in the 1650 free. The Gamecocks, one of the Honorable Mentions in the power rankings, placed 19th with 41 points, 37 of which came from diver Sophie Verzyl. They also scored four in the 800 free relay. The Tar Heels placed 24th with 33 points, getting contributions from individual swimming (11), relays (6) and diving (16). The team’s 17 swimming points were more than three times their psych sheet score (5). Only two teams we predicted to make the top 25 missed out: Nebraska and Fresno State (two fell out of the top 25 and three moved in relative to the power rankings due to the tie for 25th between Kansas and Auburn). Finish Team Final Power Ranking Difference 27 Nebraska 25 ↓2 43 Fresno State 24 ↓19 The Cornhuskers were predicted to place 25th but just missed out, taking 27th with 24 points. Seeded to score 15 points in the pool, Nebraska exceeded that with 18, but earned six in diving, which is fewer than some were expecting. The Bulldogs were predicted to place 24th, largely due to the impact of BYU transfer Mackenzie Lung, who scored 29 points last year after placing 2nd in the 200 breast and 7th in the 100 breast. Lung, seeded to score 18 points, ended up only putting two on the board after placing 15th in the 200 breast, which left Fresno State back in 43rd place.See the full NCAA Championship box score here.
Final Scores
Team Total Individual Swim Points Relay Points Diving Points Individual Score Count Relay Score Count Diving Score Count 1 UVA 589 389 200 0 38 5 0 2 Stanford 380.5 205.5 145 30 19 5 3 3 Texas 376.5 191.5 142 43 19 5 3 4 California 303 187 116 0 16 4 0 5 Tennessee 301.5 136.5 134 31 10 5 2 6 Michigan 296 141 144 11 13 5 2 7 Indiana 258 114 130 14 12 5 2 8 Louisville 201.5 108.5 93 0 11 4 0 9 NC State 196.5 98.5 98 0 9 4 0 10 Florida 125.5 63.5 36 26 6 3 2 11 Alabama 100.5 32.5 68 0 4 4 0 12 Ohio State 87 36 26 25 3 3 3 13 Wisconsin 70.5 40.5 30 0 4 4 0 14 USC 66 26 40 0 4 3 0 15 Georgia 63 39 24 0 5 2 0 16 Minnesota 55 6 0 49 1 0 5 17 PITT 55 41 14 0 5 3 0 18 Miami (FL) 48 0 0 48 0 0 3 19 South Carolina 41 0 4 37 0 1 2 20 UCLA 39 28 4 7 3 1 1 21 LSU 35 5 30 0 1 3 0 22 Duke 35 25 10 0 3 2 0 23 Purdue 35 0 0 35 0 0 3 24 UNC 33 11 6 16 4 1 2 25 Kansas 25 0 0 25 0 0 2 26 Auburn 25 0 14 11 0 2 2 27 Nebraska 24 18 0 6 2 0 1 28 Arkansas 23.5 0.5 0 23 1 0 3 29 Arizona 21 5 16 0 1 2 0 30 Texas A&M 19.5 4.5 10 5 1 1 2 31 Florida St 16 0 0 16 0 0 1 32 Cincinnati 11 11 0 0 1 0 0 33 ND 9 7 2 0 1 1 0 34 Akron 9 9 0 0 1 0 0 35 Nevada 9 9 0 0 1 0 0 36 Northwestern 8 0 8 0 0 1 0 37 Penn 6 6 0 0 2 0 0 38 Arizona State 6 0 6 0 0 1 0 39 VT 6 6 0 0 1 0 0 40 SIU 4 4 0 0 1 0 0 41 Rutgers 4 0 0 4 0 0 2 42 Washington St. 3 3 0 0 2 0 0 43 Indiana State 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 44 Fresno State 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 45 Princeton 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 46 East Carolina 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 47 UCSD 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 48 North Texas 1 0 0 1 0 0 1Read the full story on SwimSwam: How Did We Do? Reviewing SwimSwam’s Final 2026 Women’s NCAA Power Rankings
Hence then, the article about how did we do reviewing swimswam s final 2026 women s ncaa power rankings was published today ( ) and is available on swimswam ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( How Did We Do? Reviewing SwimSwam’s Final 2026 Women’s NCAA Power Rankings )
Also on site :