We may find out. Clemson plays no one. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see 1 loss Oregon be ahead of unbeaten Clemson.
Oregon has played Georgia who destroyed them and they had a good home win against UCLA. Otherwise, they've played no one. So I can only assume that you are seriously over valuing the UCLA win. Clemson has beaten Wake Forest, NC State and Syracuse and remains unbeaten. That's hardly no one.
If you want to talk about a team who has played no one, that would be Ohio State and 6 of their 7 games have been at home.
In the scenario where Oregon wins the Pac 12, they will have wins over UCLA, Utah, and probably USC (in the title game). I believe those 3 teams are better than any team in the ACC outside of Clemson.
The committee has often rewarded teams for playing tough out of conference games, even when they don't go their way. I mean the very first playoff, Ohio State lost by 14 points at home in their 2nd game to Va Tech. They won out and started crushing teams and jumped both TCU and Baylor that had been ahead of them the whole time until the last week (and OSU went on to win the national title). Now they both had 1 loss like OSU did, but they also scheduled their non-con to play no one, which was a large factor for the committee (in their own words).
Yes, Oregon got whipped by Georgia, but they played Georgia. Had Oregon played some team like Idaho and crushed them, they'd pretty clearly be ahead of Clemson at this point, so why should you reward Clemson for playing no one (I get they have South Carolina still, but they aren't good this year)? I don't think it is a given that an unbeaten Clemson will automatically be ahead of a 1 loss Oregon. It certainly may depend how it goes down the stretch, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility.