Well, this isn’t how it works and I’m surprised you don’t know that. You can certainly make up your own rules which you have done here, but your rules don’t match how this is done when history notes are made regarding wins and losses with ranked teams.
if you had simply said the Gophers didn’t have any wins over teams that were ranked at the end of the year, and left it at that… no problem. But instead you said the Gophers didn’t have any wins over ranked teams which is an incorrect statement. Go ahead and double/triple down on your wrong statement but it is still wrong.
Ironically Purdue and for sure Wisconsin would be in the final top 25 IF THE GOPHERS HADNT BEATEN THEM.
This isn’t how what works? This isn’t an official proceeding. There aren’t rules for “how it works”
The gophers have beaten zero teams that ended in the top 25. Which is how you evaluate quality wins at the end of the year.
Yeah the gophers beat a team in the top 25 at the time of the game.
do you honestly think the time of the game is a better representation of quality wins?
If that is the case no wonder Iowa is ranked higher…3 top 25 wins and 2 top 10 wins
(17 Indiana, 9 Iowa state, 4 Penn state)
if that is the case wisconsin should be rated higher.
beat ranked Purdue, Iowa,
Only one unranked loss to Minnesota since they lost to ranked Penn state.
purdue probably should be ranked ahead of Mn too
Beat number 2 and number 3
Lost to two unranked, #4 and #12
if you want to use the rankings from the times of the game there is even a worse case for Minnesota to be ranked.
sorry, whether you want them to be or not, wisconsin isn’t a top 25 win