Really going this route? Because using "yeah, well Vanderbilt had 2 really good years before their coach left" is a terrible comparison. Anyway:
2003: 8-5
2004: 5-6
2005 7-5
2006 8-5
2007 12-2 Final ranking: 5/4
2008 10-4 Final ranking: 16/19
2009 8-5
2010 10-3 Final ranking: 14/14
2011 8-5
2012 5-7
2013 12-2 Final rankings: 5/5
2014 8-2
No on here is arguing "they're world-beaters," "they're powerhouses," "they're going to consistently be in or win the conference race," or "they're going to win 10-12 games every season."
They're by no means bottom-feeders, though. They haven't been remotely near that level, and it's been over a decade now. (I could get it if we were talking about that team in the 80s.)
They're by no means a great yearly team, but they're at least a middle of the road program at this point.
(Pretty much they're another Ole Miss...they'll spend most of their seasons finish middle of the road/pack; they'll have those every-so-often really good years, but they'll fall short of the kinds of championship victories needed to raise that program into the next echelon.)