WVU Torpedoed in AP Poll: California Voters Still Lower WVU in Poll
Justin K. Aller/Getty Images
A California AP Top 25 voter is apparently not at all impressed with WVU. In Week 1 polls released Tuesday, WVU was curiously lower in one poll than the others.
The USA Today Coaches Poll had WVU solidly in eighth place with 1,032 points. The Mountaineers were a comfortable 89 points ahead of No. 9 South Carolina, and 60 below No. 7 Georgia.
ESPN.com's Power Rankings also had WVU comfortably in eighth place, between No. 7 Georgia and their No. 9 Michigan State, again closer to No. 7 than No. 9.
The AP Poll has WVU tied with South Carolina for the ninth spot, with Arkansas at No. 8. A little curious; It's just one spot. No conspiracy theories here.
It turns out the reason for the disparity comes from a San Francisco area voter who didn't even include the Mountaineers in his top 20. In fact he voted them No. 24.
According to Mitch Vingle of the Charleston Gazette, he was curious too. As an AP Poll voter, he had WVU at No. 5. That may be a little high, but hey, he's from West Virginia. Besides, three spots is an honest difference in perception. Vingle explains convincingly in his article how he came up with his vote.
But a difference of No. 8 to No. 24? Vingle reports contacting the voter, Ray Ratto of Comcast SportsNet Bay Area.Com by email to ask why Ratto had WVU so low in the rankings. According to Vingle, Ratto responded; "I wasn't really convinced that West Virginia was going to be a Top 10 team before the season started."
Ratto had actually voted WVU No. 23 in the preseason poll and dropped them one after they defeated Marshall 69-34. Ratto did admit to Vingle that he could be completely wrong in his assessment, explaining that's why we vote every week.
Ratto originally reported the WVU over Marshall as WVU over Elon. Mr. Ratto, if you're just not impressed with eastern schools, it is WEST Virginia University!
Comments welcome and appreciated!
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?