CRCA News

Now that Division I women's rowing has been officially designated as a team sport, there has been discussion about whether or not to introduce a system of automatic conference qualification (AQ) to the selection process. The Division I Women's Rowing Committee has asked the Collegiate Rowing Coaches Association to assist them in determining the opinion of coaches of women's rowing programs regarding conference AQ. Prior to conducting a survey or poll, the CRCA is publishing this educational piece so that all involved in the discussion have a common basis of understanding.

Under the current system, sixteen institutions will be selected and are required to field a first eight, second eight, and four. All 87 Division I institutions that sponsor women's rowing have been placed in one of five geographical regions [central (14), mid-Atlantic (29), New England (13), south (15), west (16)]. At least one team from each region will be selected. However, there is no established methodology for determining which one team will be selected from each region; it is completely up to the discretion of the Women's Rowing Committee based on an entire season's race results.

There are no official NCAA regional championships. There are some end of season championship events that resemble regional championships, but they are not sanctioned or organized by the NCAA. The Pacific-10 Conference Championships are administered by the Pac-10 Conference but are open to all schools in the west region. The South/Central Region Sprints are a coach-organized competition that is open to any school in the south or central region. The Eastern Association of Women's Rowing Colleges (EAWRC) Championship Regatta offers competition for its seventeen member schools in the open weight categories. This year the winner of the first eight race at the ECAC / Metro League Rowing Championships will receive an invitation to compete in the EAWRC Sprints in all events. The Dad Vail Regatta is an open regatta.

In order for a conference to be eligible for automatic qualification to the national championships, they must have six member institutions that sponsor the sport and they must have conducted conference competition together for two years. Keep in mind that a multi-sport conference may add affiliate members in the sport of women's rowing if they choose to do so. It is also possible to establish a single sport conference in the sport of women's rowing and to meet the criteria for AQ. However, the NCAA has a moratorium on all single sport conferences until August 7, 2011. It is completely within the discretion of each conference to decide how and when to determine its conference champion for AQ purposes.

Currently six conferences meet the criteria for AQ:
Atlantic 10 (9), Atlantic Coast (6), Big East (8), Big Ten (7), Ivy Group (8), Pacific-10 (7)

The Colonial Athletic Association added an affiliate member in 2009 to bring their total to six member institutions and conducted their first conference competition. There are three conferences that have five member institutions that sponsor women's rowing: Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference, Patriot League, and West Coast Conference.

The NCAA rules stipulate that if a sufficient number of conferences apply for an AQ, fifty percent of the championship field shall be filled through AQ. However, unless there were to be an exception to the NCAA rules, the remaining fifty percent of the championship field will be open to at large selection. So although there are now only six conferences that could get an AQ, the number of conferences that would gain automatic selection could go as high as eight, but no higher, regardless of the total number of eligible conferences.

Most people involved in the sport anticipate that the number of conferences that meet the criteria for AQ will be greater than eight in the near future, especially if conference AQ is adopted for the sport. A key issue that must be considered is what would happen in that situation. The Women's Rowing Committee is reluctant to recommend that AQ be added to the sport of women's rowing without also having a plan in place for how to address the issue of more than eight eligible conferences.

One approach would be to wait until all conference champions for the year have been determined and for the Women's Rowing Committee to choose the top eight conference champions using the normal selection criteria. The other conference champions would be put into consideration with all other institutions for the at-large team selections. Under this scenario, being named a conference champion of an AQ-eligible conference would not guarantee selection to the national championships.

Another way to narrow the conference champions to eight AQs would be through a play-in system. Some conference champions would be selected to the championship field directly, along with the at-large teams. Then two or more conference champions would compete against each other for the remaining conference AQ spot(s). That play-in competition could conceivably take place at the location of the national championships. Or certain conferences could be directed in advance to have their champions meet at an agreed upon site for the play-in. The cost and logistical considerations of a play-in system are somewhat daunting. Deciding how to determine the play-in champion is also problematic. A competition solely between the first eights of the respective institutions may send an awkward message about the team aspect of the national championships. But under the current scoring and tie-breaking system, any head-to-head competition in the three boat categories is practically reduced to the winner of the first eight anyhow.

While this paper will now address some pros and cons of different systems of selection, it is not meant to advocate any particular system, but rather to frame the discussion. It is generally agreed upon by all parties that conference AQ would likely result in some dilution of the quality of the championship field (i.e. the top sixteen teams would not gain selection). Proponents of the current system suggest that the most important consideration in selecting the championship field is to get the fastest sixteen teams selected. Although they recognize that other NCAA team sports selection processes that utilize AQs do not get the highest quality field possible, they do not feel that is a desirable system for women's rowing. The proponents of conference AQ point out many benefits to such a system. They suggest that the importance of conference competition will be enhanced and conference support of women's rowing will increase. They also suggest that more institutions are likely to sponsor the sport, or increase their level of support for their current teams, if conference AQ is adopted. Some institutions in the mid-Atlantic and New England regions that do not have EAWRC membership believe that conference AQ will give them a better opportunity for access to the championships. Adoption of conference AQ could affect the timing and format of already existing conference rowing tournaments. As the requirement for one team per region would no longer be in effect if conference AQ comes into existence, the impact on regional assignments, out of region racing, and season ending championships such as the South / Central Region Sprints is up in the air.

For simplicity sake, it would be easiest to fashion the decision as a simple one between the current system and a system of conference AQ. But as stated previously, the decision must include a consideration of what to do when the number of eligible conferences exceeds eight. Thus coaches should be prepared to answer the question "Do you advocate conference AQ even if it means that winning your conference championship doesn't guarantee selection to the NCAA national championships?"