College Recruiting Times

Division II women's 100 Free college swimming recruiting times

Updated July 2026 · 2025-26 season roster times

Take a look at the 100 Free across 94 women's Division II teams. Open a school to see the rest of its team’s times.

Typical roster reference points

Typical scorer tier

54.36

Typical roster median

56.14

Typical depth tier

1:01.78

Fast-program scorer tier

53.37

These are the middle values across the schools shown. Scorer covers a roster’s top quarter; median is the middle time; depth is the back quarter.

Showing 1–25 of 94 programs

#SchoolRosterMedianTo scoreSave
1
McKendree UniversityLebanon, IL · Division IILebanon, IL · 7 swimmers
752.0951.48 to score51.48
2
Colorado MesaGrand Junction, CO · Division IIGrand Junction, CO · 15 swimmers
1552.1051.08 to score51.08
3
TampaTampa, FL · Division IITampa, FL · 18 swimmers
1852.1251.51 to score51.51
4
Drury UniversitySpringfield, MO · Division IISpringfield, MO · 15 swimmers
1552.1951.58 to score51.58
5
Simon FraserBurnaby, BC · Division IIBurnaby, BC · 7 swimmers
752.2851.46 to score51.46
6
Nova SoutheasternFort Lauderdale, FL · Division IIFort Lauderdale, FL · 17 swimmers
1752.6651.69 to score51.69
7
Catawba CollegeSalisbury, NC · Division IISalisbury, NC · 15 swimmers
1553.1151.68 to score51.68
8
UNC PembrokePembroke, NC · Division IIPembroke, NC · 9 swimmers
953.1852.57 to score52.57
9
Delta StateCleveland, MS · Division IICleveland, MS · 15 swimmers
1553.4151.26 to score51.26
10
West FloridaPensacola, FL · Division IIPensacola, FL · 18 swimmers
1853.4452.27 to score52.27
11
Grand Valley StateAllendale, MI · Division IIAllendale, MI · 16 swimmers
1653.5052.25 to score52.25
12
IndianapolisIndianapolis, IN · Division IIIndianapolis, IN · 20 swimmers
2053.6651.40 to score51.40
13
Florida TechMelbourne, FL · Division IIMelbourne, FL · 15 swimmers
1553.6853.50 to score53.50
14
UMSLSt. Louis, MO · Division IISt. Louis, MO · 11 swimmers
1153.8453.22 to score53.22
15
Wayne State (MI)Detroit, MI · Division IIDetroit, MI · 8 swimmers
853.8853.59 to score53.59
16
Northern MichiganMarquette, MI · Division IIMarquette, MI · 20 swimmers
2053.9052.61 to score52.61
17
West ChesterWest Chester, PA · Division IIWest Chester, PA · 9 swimmers
953.9452.93 to score52.93
18
Florida Southern CollegeLakeland, FL · Division IILakeland, FL · 17 swimmers
1753.9553.07 to score53.07
19
Colorado MinesGolden, CO · Division IIGolden, CO · 20 swimmers
2054.0152.74 to score52.74
20
Lynn UniversityBoca Raton, FL · Division IIBoca Raton, FL · 16 swimmers
1654.0452.40 to score52.40
21
Hillsdale CollegeHillsdale, MI · Division IIHillsdale, MI · 12 swimmers
1254.5453.45 to score53.45
22
Wingate UniversityWingate, NC · Division IIWingate, NC · 22 swimmers
2254.6151.89 to score51.89
23
Saginaw Valley StateUniversity Center, MI · Division IIUniversity Center, MI · 17 swimmers
1754.6353.40 to score53.40
24
Augustana (SD)Sioux Falls, SD · Division IISioux Falls, SD · 15 swimmers
1554.6653.20 to score53.20
25
Cal State East BayHayward, CA · Division IIHayward, CA · 14 swimmers
1454.7753.21 to score53.21
← PreviousPage 1 of 4Next →

Common questions

How are these programs ranked?

We order programs by their roster's median time in the 100 Free. That's the time a middle-of-the-roster swimmer goes, so the ranking reflects the whole team, not just the fastest swimmer. A program appears only when it has at least 4 swimmers rostered in the event.

Is the roster median a recruiting cutoff?

No. It is a snapshot of the current roster, not a coach-issued cutoff. A coach may recruit above or below it depending on event needs, class needs, development, academics, and available roster space.

Where do the times come from?

The actual times current swimmers have posted this 2025-26 season, pulled from program rosters — not qualifying standards or a coach's estimate.

What do score, contribute, and depth mean?

They are roster tiers. Scorer is a roster's top quarter, contributor is the middle half, and depth is the back of the roster. They describe the swimmers already on the team. See how we rank for the full method.