I limited my answers because you stated that only 2 didn't sticker. I don't disagree with your assessment on the color. That large cent stills looks to have more wear than an AU55 should IMO, sticker or no sticker.
I have no faith in CAC, who really needs them? PCGS does a fine job why should anyone second guess them. Are the graders at CAC extra ordinary in coin grading and who does it really help to get a bean put on their holder? Users here on CoinTalk do a great job on grading without coin in hand. If somebody could come up with a robot that could really grade a coin without a bias opinion then that would work.
Not me - I know they know more about some of these coins than I do. Second we are going by pictures(and not the best at that - no offense intended) - they had them in hand. People tend to forget that large pictures like this make lots of little flaws worse than they really are in hand under a 5x loupe. PS - Send them to me and I betcha I change my mind about a few of them.
It's all a question of the "mood" of the graders,if they got a lil' "bean" in the morning you get the sticker......
Well, according to Q. David Bowers, early San Francisco mint cents (1900s-early 1910s) came out of the mint like that. The metal used was more brassy and often was streaky. This is a good way to tell if early SF cents have been dipped or not. That is probably why your 1909 S got stickered. Check out his book on Lincolns here-http://www.amazon.com/Guide-Lincoln-Cents-Official-Books/dp/0794822649