Although Baylor is ranked, the committee and others are pretty much saying that they're not very good and are only ranked based on their wins vs losses. The problem for the Big12 is that they are still the second weakest P5 conference (ACC being the weakest) and their champion would need to be undefeated to get in the playoff.

If we look at Oklahoma's loss vs Utah's loss what the committee is saying is that Oklahoma lost to a bad Kansas State team and are squeaking by other bad Big12 teams. Utah on the other hand... well let's just get the quote:

“Obviously when you look at Alabama, outstanding play. Their only loss is to the No. 1 team in the country, and in every other game they’ve had convincing wins. Oregon is a team that’s won nine in a row, good road wins against ranked Southern Cal, at Washington, quality quarterback play, undefeated in the conference, only loss on a neutral field to Auburn. And then Utah, really strong defense, only loss is to No. 23 USC, and that’s what separated them from Oregon, and when they lost to USC, Zack Moss, their elite running back, missed most of that game.”

So although Utah loss to 'sc, they're looking at a situation where Moss is out, and although not noted here, Huntley was hobbled. With them back in full health they get the nod. We also see What they think of Oregon, so if Utah wins out they have no bad losses, a bigger win against a ranked opponent, and pass the eye test on both sides of the ball.

That's how the committee is looking at the teams/standings.