What I'm saying is it's allot of politics. Yes those champions especially over the last 15 years will have a higher blue chip ranking. But they get those rankings in large part because they're bought. There's a reason these sites are private. Not necessarily ones like this. But the scouts,the rivals,the on 3, the ESPN etc. there's allot of money in this stuff. Just the same way you have all these sec & big 10 schools no matter of how good they actually are constantly at the top of rankings it's the same for recruiting. In polls they keep them throughout the top 25,top 10,top 5 because it gives there front runners, quality wins & balances quality losses. The ACC a loss means far more because you don't have all these teams ranked like this. I'm not gonna get into what people believe it they think sec football top to BOTTOM, Is amazing or not. It's not relevant. But that's the method. Same thing happens in recruiting. Just go look up the recruiting budgets & the roster spends on those teams in the sec & the big 10. When they recruit a kid if he's not highly rated it effects their top end. It effects class rankings,it effects what boosters & nil is willing to spend. How do they counter it? By paying all of these sights for inflated rankings. This is a fact. Not some conspiracy theory. So obviously they're gonna have the higher blue chip ratio because they play with a stacked deck. Most of these kids what differentiates them is in their heads & their habits. No recruiting sight and their rankings reflects that.