USA Today

Championship weekend could not have gone worse for the College Football Playoff selection committee, whose job went from difficult to very difficult after a chalky slate of games that left more questions than answers.

The top six teams from last week's poll—and the only six power-conference teams with one or fewer losses—all won their season finales, most taking care of business in convincing fashion. Each could make a very strong case for inclusion, but two will be left out.

So…what's the committee to do?

Does it simply let last week's rankings hold? That wouldn't be in its bylaws, according to Campus Insiders' Bonnie Bernstein, who reminded us that the committee starts from scratch each week:

Instead, the committee will weigh each team's merits based on an overall body of work, trying as best they can to keep bias from creeping into play. Essentially, they will try to zone out the name of each program and evaluate each case based on what they have seen on the field.

In a perfect world, they wouldn't have to know the team names at all.

Let's do our best to simulate that.

USA TODAY Sports

Below are some baseline numbers. It is each team's overall record, followed by which Top 25 teams it has beaten and the ranking of the team it has lost to (where applicable). Both of those ranking numbers refer to the Week 15 CFP standings released Tuesday evening.

The final number (in bold) refers to the F/+ rankings at Football Outsiders, a context-adjusted efficiency metric that some would call an "advanced stat." The F/+ ratings are a strong barometer of team performance, albeit one that is far from perfect. That is why we've used it as one of many variables instead of the ultimate factor.

The F/+ rankings, too, have not been updated to reflect Week 15.

Blind Resumes for Top Playoff Contenders Team Record F/+ Rank Top 25 Wins Who Beat Them? Team 1 11-1 4 9, 20 6 Team 2 12-1 3 7, 8, 15, 23 7 Team 3 12-1 2 8, 13 NR Team 4 13-0 8 11, 18, 21 – Team 5 11-1 11 3, 9, 20 NR Team 6 12-1 1 10, 16, 19, 24 12 Source: Various

Like I said the last time I looked at blind resumes: Everyone who looks at this table sees something different because everyone who follows college football values something different.

What, for example, is more important: Good wins or bad losses? Neither answer is objectively correct. Both sides have merit, and each individual is tasked with doing their own mental calculus to decide.

Here is how I—subjectively—would rank these teams based on the numbers above (including their records) and nothing else:

Team 2 Team 6 Team 4 Team 1 Team 3 Team 5

My own subjective preference places a heavy emphasis on the F/+ ratings, which explains Team 6 ranking ahead of Team 4 and Team 3 ranking ahead of Team 5. You are well within your rights to disagree.

No matter what metric you value, however, there is no denying the obvious flaw of this table. As mentioned above, the rankings do not take Week 15 into account. The F/+ ratings won't be updated in time for the final standings, but let's do our best to rectify that:

Blind Resumes for Top Playoff Contenders – Week 15 Results Team Opponent F/+ Point Margin Yard Margin YPP Margin* Team 1 87 +52 +486 +5.47 Team 2 28 +38 +403 +3.00 Team 3 13 +59 +300 +6.73 Team 4 12 +2 +3 +1.06 Team 5 18 +11 +181 +0.62 Team 6 31 +29 +191 +2.46 Source: Various

*YPP = Yards Per Play

Well hello there, Team 3. Welcome to the party.

Here is how my rankings from above—the ones I have gone out of my way to call subjective—would change based on this new data:

Team 2 Team 3 Team 6 Team 4 Team 1 Team 5

But we still have one more table to go.

Using the data from Week 15, here is each team's statistical profile. This ignores records, although it doesn't, unfortunately, account for strength of opponent. If you need context, it might be best (although still not perfect) to compare these numbers with the Top 25 wins on the first table.

Blind Resumes for Top Playoff Contenders Team Points/Game Margin* Yards/Game Margin* Yards/Play Margin Team 1 +26.5 +182.7 +1.93 Team 2 +24.0 +131.7 +1.94 Team 3 +22.3 +179.6 +2.25 Team 4 +11.8 +54.9 +1.08 Team 5 +24.7 +213.7 +0.80 Team 6 +20.5 +181.2 +2.19 Source: Various

*Calculated by subtracting points, yards and yards per play allowed per game from points, yards and yards per play scored/gained per game.

Interesting.

If you only look at raw statistics, Team 4 and Team 5 are clearly the worst of the bunch. They are great but far from dominant, which makes them an outlier from the other four teams on the table.

Looking back at the previous table, this appears to line up with the F/+ ratings, which did not look favorably upon Team 4 and Team 5. It will have a higher opinion of those teams after beating quality opponents this weekend, but it still won't move them into the top four.

The only thing keeping Team 4 in the discussion is its undefeated record (I bet you can't guess who it is!). But in a blind resume exercise, I'll take the four teams that have been better, on paper, despite the fact that they have one more loss than Team 4.

Here are my final subjective ratings:

Team 2 Team 3 Team 6 Team 1 Team 4 Team 5

And now…to reveal their identities:

Oregon Ohio State Alabama TCU Florida State Baylor

They're curious things, these blind resumes. They don't spit out the results you expect. I do not want to peel back the curtain, but I can assure you this was not how I ordered my B/R Week 16 ballot.

Factors such as Florida State's perfect record—and, more importantly, the strength of the ACC—and Baylor's head-to-head win over TCU will have to be considered by the committee, won't they?

I guess we'll learn the answer on Sunday.

For now, chime in below and let us know how you would order the blind resumes. And remember…what we value is subjective.

There are no wrong opinions (except the ones I disagree with).