CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Premo-Porretta Power Poll

retroactive rankings in US college basketball

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 17, 2026
Entity authorityQ19869507 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Premo-Porretta Power Poll is a retroactive end-of-year ranking for American college basketball teams competing in the 1895–96 through the 1947–48 seasons. These rankings are not officially recognized by the NCAA.

The poll was intended to serve collectively as a source of information regarding the relative standings of college basketball teams within given seasons during the early decades of the sport. No systematic end-of-season national tournament existed in college basketball until the founding of the National Invitation Tournament in 1938 and the NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship Tournament in 1939, the latter of which determines the NCAA champion for a given season. Furthermore, no regular, recognized national polling took place for college basketball prior to the establishment of the Associated Press poll and the coaches poll in the 1948–49 and 1950–51 seasons, respectively.

Background

Patrick Premo, a professor emeritus of accounting at St. Bonaventure University, and Phil Porretta, a former computer programmer, have each spent more than 40 years—first separately, and later collaboratively—researching the early history of college basketball. Their archival work has often uncovered game results that had not previously been reported in books and basketball program media guides, such as the results of competition against AAU, semi-professional, club, and YMCA teams. Whereas Bill Schroeder of the Helms Athletic Foundation retroactively named only his choice of the top team nationally for each season from 1900–01 through 1941–42 (and then annually selected a national champion for each season from 1942–43 through 1981–82), Premo and Porretta have used the data they have compiled to compare teams against one another and assign rankings to multiple teams for each season—15 teams for the 1895–96 season, 20 teams for each season from 1896–97 through 1908–09, and 25 teams for each season from 1909–10 through 1947–48.

Premo's findings, which he clarified were "simply his opinion", were first published in 1995 as the Premo Power Poll. Most recently, in 2009, Premo and Porretta's full collaborative rankings were included with the core information for each season prior to 1949 in the ESPN College Basketball Encyclopedia.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Premo-Porretta Power Poll” is retroactive rankings in US college basketball. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Premo-Porretta, Power and Poll, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1895, 1947, 1938, 1939—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Premo-Porretta, Power and Poll is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “retroactive rankings in US college basketball” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 17, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q19869507. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1895, 1947, 1938 and 1939.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Premo-Porretta Power Poll”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Premo-Porretta Power Poll primary sources, Premo-Porretta Power Poll archive and Premo-Porretta research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Premo-Porretta Power Poll”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Premo-Porretta Power Poll” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.