I think part of this is that we never really decided on a "standard" power ranking concept here.
Power rankings IMHO should be "who would win on a neutral field?" rankings. Because it's not about record, it's not about anything that happened in past weeks, it's about who they are going forward. That doesn't mean past weeks don't matter, because they can tell us a lot about a team, but that if a fluke upset (say Purdue's 49-20 rout of OSU in 2018) aren't indicative of the relative strengths of the teams going forward, they shouldn't impact a power ranking.
And I think while power rankings may take injuries into account, in my mind a power ranking shouldn't really take in transient injuries.
For example, even going into last week I might have considered Clemson above Notre Dame in a "power ranking" even though I knew Trevor Lawrence was out that week [because all expectations were that it is transient], and now that he's back I don't see it as ridiculous to put Clemson above Notre Dame in a "power ranking" even though ND now has the H2H victory.
Now, if Trevor Lawrence had gone down with an ACL tear two weeks before the Notre Dame game, that probably changes. Because if you know he's out the whole season, the team simply isn't as good without him as it is with him.
So IMHO I don't really consider any of this COVID stuff to be important in a power ranking. COVID is basically a transient "injury" like the flu to most college-age athletes. It's not like Wisconsin or Illinois lost players for the season, or lost them in a way that we have any reasonable expectation they won't return at 100%.
So if I participated in these, I'd still have Wisconsin pretty high, regardless of COVID, because they're a good team. And I'd still have Illinois low, regardless of COVID, because even at full strength I think they'd suck.