Around this point in the season, we all wallow in nuance, mainly revolving around two different terms: "best" and "most deserving." The College Football Playoff committee attempts to navigate between the two adjectives and tends to lean a little closer to the latter (too close for my tastes).

Selecting four teams for a playoff is about right to me. In most years, you can find about two to six teams that have stood out from the others (honestly, you could say 2016 has produced just one), and keeping the CFP small means sticking as closely as possible to the "The regular season matters!" campaign slogan.

But we cannot help ourselves. No matter the circumstances — one dominant team and a large second tier, five teams indistinguishable from each other, etc. — our conclusion appears to be "... and that's why we need an eight-team Playoff."

An eight-team draw would have some benefits. No more debating between Conference Champion D and Conference Champion E. No more debating "conference title bumps." Stick five power-conference champions into the draw, add the top three at-large teams (including the top mid-major), and voila.

Plus, this could add a round of humongous home games, if you let better seeds host quarterfinals.

An eight-team draw would also add another adjective to the debate: "hottest."

Tell me you wouldn't be tempted to pick a hypothetical No. 6 seed USC to reach the CFP finals in 2016.

Here’s a look at S&P+ ratings, if you only look at the last seven weeks of competition.

Generally speaking, looking at only recent performances gives us a misleading impression. At most, we only have 10-11 games of evidence about each team, and limiting ourselves to only the last two or three tends to make us less accurate, not more.

But that’s generally speaking. Some teams collapse midseason because of an injury or a lack of depth. Others flip a switch and surge because of a coaching change, a quarterback change, or other adjustments.

A ranking that emphasizes recent games might not be more predictive overall, but it can add a layer of description. Looking at only the last seven weeks tells us our eyes haven’t lied: LSU and USC are among the hottest teams in the country.

LSU replacing Les Miles with interim Ed Orgeron was part of a reset. Derrius Guice came into his own at running back, Leonard Fournette got healthy, the defense has remained stout, and the Tigers have lost only to Alabama, in a game that was tied heading into the fourth quarter.

USC handed the reins to redshirt freshman Sam Darnold after three frustrating weeks. The result: an improvement from 20.3 points per game to 36.1 and a run of six straight victories. The Trojans fell to Utah in Darnold’s first start, a game determined as much by turnovers luck as anything else. Since then, they have dominated.

Neither has a shot at the CFP, of course. USC can still win the Pac-12 (if current Pac-12 South leader Colorado loses), but it is impossible for a three-loss team to reach the CFP’s top four. An eight-teamer, however ...

(We’ll see where LSU and USC rank in Tuesday night’s new rankings. They’re unlikely to be in the top 10 already, but it wouldn’t be a surprise to see either nearby. Two three-loss teams ranked in the committee’s pre-bowls top 10 in 2014.)

How a team finishes a season isn’t necessarily predictive of how it would do in a playoff.

Syracuse’s men’s basketball team was awful at the end of the regular season last year, losing five of its last six games, eking out a tourney bid with a No. 10 seed, then plowing through four wins to reach the Final Four.

Still, right now, it would be hard to pick almost anybody not named Bama against either the Trojans or Tigers.

LSU still has limitations with its passing game, but the USC we saw thumping Washington on Saturday night seemed to have very few weaknesses.

Offensively, the Trojans are up to fifth in Passing S&P+. Darnold's passer rating is 165.8 at the moment, and he hasn't fallen below 146 in any of his seven starts. The run game isn't as good (21st in Rushing S&P+), but it is good enough to command attention from opposing defenses.

Meanwhile, the Utah loss was a moment of reckoning for the defense.

USC defense, first 4 games: 29.3 points per game, 5.8 yards per play, 47% average S&P+ defensive percentile performance

29.3 points per game, 5.8 yards per play, 47% average S&P+ defensive percentile performance USC defense, last 6 games: 18.0 points per game, 4.8 yards per play, 88% average S&P+ defensive percentile performance

Defensive coordinator Clancy Pendergast’s Trojans destroyed Washington in the trenches and made Husky quarterback Jake Browning’s life miserable. The previously unflappable Browning appeared to break down mentally and physically by the fourth quarter.

In 2002, Pete Carroll’s second season at USC, the Trojans dealt with some early season adversity (and a monstrous schedule) but finished playing better than anybody in the country. Early losses meant they had to settle for an Orange Bowl win instead of a title attempt, but their run of dominance continued into 2003 and beyond.

Clay Helton’s first season in charge produced enough shaky early moments for some to believe he might already be on the hot seat. But since a quarterback change and a come-to-Jesus moment in Salt Lake City, USC has rolled.

Once again, the Trojans are young enough to be positioned for future dominance, even if they will once again have to settle for a great finish and a bowl with no title stakes.

Hypothetical eight-team 2014 Playoff:

8 Michigan State/Boise State* at 1 Alabama,

5 Baylor at 4 Ohio State,

6 TCU at 3 Florida State,

7 Mississippi State at 2 Oregon.

Hypothetical eight-team 2015 Playoff:

8 Notre Dame/Houston* at 1 Clemson,

5 Iowa at 4 Oklahoma,

6 Stanford at 3 Michigan State,

7 Ohio State at 2 Alabama.

* Depending on whether mid-majors got an automatic bid or not.