Fan of Fanboys - so are none of you fanooks coming to the A&M v Clemson game?
I'll be there most likely, also auburn in 2010 does not meet your 50% blue chip thresh hold
well it is not my threshold but the creator of it says this about Auburn, emphasis on the last paragraph:
So what was that about 2010 Auburn?
Either due to data changing after the fact, via industry contraction/expansion/merger, or perhaps due to an error of my own, 2010 Auburn no longer seems to meet 50 percent in the BCR.
Absent using the Wayback Machine, Scout rankings are no longer available. For some Auburn signees, like Jonathon Mincy, the Composite shows that he did not have a star rating from any service, but I know that is not true because Rivals, Scout, and ESPN had him as a graded prospect. There is something going on with how the data is imported or calculated in some of these Auburn classes.
Auburn also was one of the teams who took advantage of the old rules governing the number of signees allowed in a given year. With no real limit on the number of signees, but rather just on enrollees, Auburn would sign scores of players with little to no chance of qualifying, likely to give the player some motivation to complete junior college and come back and enroll in two years.
The 2007 Auburn press release on its class has six such examples, using the following phrase:
"Expected to enroll in junior college/prep school before entering Auburn."
Those letters, of course, are not binding. From 2007-09, Auburn had 17 such signees not enroll. It signed an incredible 117 prospects in that span, a brilliant exploitation of the loophole, which really throws my data out of whack. Under newer NCAA oversigning rules, teams cannot hand out letters of intent like candy, and so this practice has largely stopped.
In any case, while I am confident that Auburn did meet the threshold when I was back-testing the model a half-decade ago, I can no longer back it up with proof like I can the more recent champions.