The Enduring Legacy of the AP Women’s Basketball Poll: From Philadelphia to National Standard
In 1976, within the bustling newsroom of The Philadelphia Inquirer, a sports editor named Jay Searcy approached writer Mel Greenberg with a novel assignment: launch a weekly national ranking for women’s college basketball. At the time, the sport operated under the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women (AIAW) and received sparse media attention. Greenberg initially hesitated, skeptical that accurate information could be gathered across a fractured landscape without the digital tools available today. Despite his reservations, he accepted the task, establishing a weekly ritual of telephone calls to coaches that would eventually evolve into the Associated Press women’s basketball poll.
The initiative marked a pivotal moment for women’s athletics, occurring years before the NCAA officially sanctioned women’s championships. By organizing a coherent national hierarchy, the poll provided legitimacy and visibility to dominant programs of the era, such as Delta State and Immaculata. What began as a localized effort in Philadelphia gained traction quickly, with the Associated Press adopting the rankings for national distribution. For decades, Greenberg—often referred to as “The Guru” of women’s basketball—oversaw the compilation, manually tabulating votes and ensuring the sport remained in the public eye during its formative years.
However, the poll has faced consistent scrutiny and objections regarding its methodology and relevance, particularly as the sport has modernized. In the 1994-95 season, the voting body shifted from a panel of coaches to a panel of media members and sportswriters. Critics argue that this transition introduced a different set of biases, questioning whether regional writers can adequately assess teams across the country given the volume of games and late start times on the West Coast.
Further objections center on the inherent subjectivity of human polling in an era dominated by advanced analytics. While metrics like the NET rankings rely on data points, the AP poll relies on the “eye test” and reputation, leading to accusations of “sticky” rankings where established “blue blood” programs retain high spots on name recognition alone while mid-majors struggle to break through. Additionally, the modern transfer portal has made preseason polling increasingly difficult, as rosters fluctuate wildly from year to year, often rendering early-season rankings inaccurate.
Despite these criticisms, the poll remains a cultural staple in collegiate sports, driving television viewership and fan engagement. It survived the transition from the AIAW to the NCAA, the explosion of cable television, and the advent of the internet. While data-driven models provide alternative viewpoints, the human element of the AP poll continues to dictate the narrative of the season, honoring a tradition that began with a single reporter and a telephone in Philadelphia.
wikipedia.org
apnews.com
phillyjewishsports.org
inquirer.com
