How good is Josh Heupel?

[VFL-82-JP]

Get this: over the past year and a half, Josh Heupel has led the Vols to 16 wins and 3 losses. That's a win rate of .842.

How good is .842? Well, Johnny Majors can't touch it; he ran .645 at Tennessee (his lifetime win rate was lower than that). Even Phillip Fulmer can't get near it; he had a win rate of .745.

There are only two coaches in Tennessee history who come close. The General had a .829 rate...yes, Josh's last season and a half exceed even Neyland's lifetime win percentage. And John Barnhill, who filled in for Neyland during World War II, he was slightly above Josh at .846 while leading the Vols.

The trolls amongst us are going to point out that Heupel's win rate is only valid if you include that 7-6 first season. I'll explain why it's not really important, but for their edification, if you DO include every game Heupel has coached the Vols, his win rate is still .719, still up at a very respectable level.

So why isn't his first season important to include? Because over time, it will disappear into the background. Example: say you take your car to the Bristol speedway, and pay to drive 50 laps around the track. Your goal is an average speed of 130 mph. So you jump in your car and get going. The first lap is disappointing, because you spend the whole thing getting up to speed: average, just 75 mph. The second lap is much better, at 120. The third lap is 125. Fourth is 128. And from there out, every lap comes out at either 131 or 132. Do you meet your goal?

Well, after just three laps it looks like there's no way you're gonna. The average of 75, 120, and 125 mph is only about 107. That first lap at 75 really threw off your average. But at the end of 10 laps, things are looking better: average is now 124. And after 50 laps of running mostly between 131 and 132, your average speed comes out at 129.94. Rounds off to 130. You made it!

That first lap is called an outlier. It doesn't fit the pattern of the rest of your race. And as the race goes on, it becomes less and less significant to the whole.

That's how Heupel's first season is going to fade into the background over time.

Earlly indications are, this man is a .800+ coach. If he can do it before the high-level recruiting even kicks in, he can do it his entire tenure at Tennesee.

We're gonna win championships with him.

Go Vols!


p.s. Even if this season ends up at a rather middling 9-3 (say 10-3 with a bowl win), that will still give Josh a two-year win rate of .808. That's just above Nick Saban's lifetime rate of .802. We got ourselves a coach.

 

[DiderotsGhost]

Heupel is a great coach, but I worry people are going to be down on him if we finish the season 8-4. And it's more likely than people realize (Mizzou is pretty damn good this year and we play them on the road).

I don't think people understand that, to some extent, this season was inevitable. We had a load of offensive talent when Heupel came in, but we had an effective dead recruiting class in 2020. And part of what we're seeing is the impact of that. Not enough O-line depth. Offense is filled with very young players and we lost all our best players to the draft (Hooker, Hyatt, D-Wright, Tillman).

Overall, Heupel has greatly outperformed given the circumstances he inherited, and I think he's the guy long-term. The fact that people have all but forgotten the situation he walked into is a testament to just how good he is. Most coaches would not have won nearly as many games as Heupel has won in the same circumstance.

 

[VolInDayton]

Heupel is a great coach, but I worry people are going to be down on him if we finish the season 8-4. And it's more likely than people realize (Mizzou is pretty damn good this year and we play them on the road).

I don't think people understand that, to some extent, this season was inevitable. We had a load of offensive talent when Heupel came in, but we had an effective dead recruiting class in 2020. And part of what we're seeing is the impact of that. Not enough O-line depth. Offense is filled with very young players and we lost all our best players to the draft (Hooker, Hyatt, D-Wright, Tillman).

Overall, Heupel has greatly outperformed given the circumstances he inherited, and I think he's the guy long-term. The fact that people have all but forgotten the situation he walked into is a testament to just how good he is. Most coaches would not have won nearly as many games as Heupel has won in the same circumstance.

The week before Mizzou we play Uconn and they play UGA at UGA. It gives me a little more confidence, but they are a good team.

 

[Cartervol]

He's good enough to know his best weapons are his RB's and put the ball in their hands. He's tiptoed the playcalling around Milton too for obvious reasons that keep showing up every week. In other words he's smart enough to not try and fit the square peg in the round hole like a lot of coaches do.

 

[GreveHaller]

its not really fair to compare JH to Johnny or Phil. It was 10 years before Johnny finished in the top 20. Phil took over a pretty good program then took it to the next level. JH doesnt have the luxury of either of those scenarios. Its unfortunate but his leash will be short if the wins are mediocre but that's the day and age we live in

 

[daj2576]

The week before Mizzou we play Uconn and they play UGA at UGA. It gives me a little more confidence, but they are a good team.

Mizzou is a mirage, like Kentucky.

Talent matters and we severely out talent both of those teams. We can definitely lose both games (and our performance under CJH on the road is inconsistent at best), but a loss in either of those games should be more shocking than the loss to SCAR last year.

 

[DaddyChad]

I think in a vacuum some people will question some of his decisions. Like not taking FGs at times, when you look big picture though I think he’s pretty aware of what he has and how to put his team in the best position to win.

 

[90 Vol]

Mizzou is a mirage, like Kentucky.

Talent matters and we severely out talent both of those teams. We can definitely lose both games (and our performance under CJH on the road is inconsistent at best), but a loss in either of those games should be more shocking than the loss to SCAR last year.

Agreed. Missouri is fool's gold.

 

[allvols4life]

its not really fair to compare JH to Johnny or Phil. It was 10 years before Johnny finished in the top 20. Phil took over a pretty good program then took it to the next level. JH doesnt have the luxury of either of those scenarios. Its unfortunate but his leash will be short if the wins are mediocre but that's the day and age we live in

Phil also had two 5-7 seasons in his last few years too. IIRC at one point his W-L % was in the 80's, before holding on too long ruined it

 

[calban]

His career is .750, right there with Phil. Probably where he'll level off to in about 10 seasons if he's stays that long.

 

[BernardKingGOAT]

its not really fair to compare JH to Johnny or Phil. It was 10 years before Johnny finished in the top 20. Phil took over a pretty good program then took it to the next level. JH doesnt have the luxury of either of those scenarios. Its unfortunate but his leash will be short if the wins are mediocre but that's the day and age we live in

Johnny's first ranked team at the end of the season was top 5

 

[EZE]

If anything, this aTm game solidified my belief in CJH. He has a mediocre QB, and instead of going full speed ahead with his preferred attacking offense, he changed the game plan to beat a decent team.

I fully expect an 8-4 finish, and to me, that is a decent season considering the limitations at QB. I expect the program to restart its climb to greater things once Nico takes the reins next season.

The transfer portal was brutal to our program after the previous Neanderthal coach was fired.

 

[savannahfan]

Get this: over the past year and a half, Josh Heupel has led the Vols to 16 wins and 3 losses. That's a win rate of .842.

How good is .842? Well, Johnny Majors can't touch it; he ran .645 at Tennessee (his lifetime win rate was lower than that). Even Phillip Fulmer can't get near it; he had a win rate of .745.

There are only two coaches in Tennessee history who come close. The General had a .829 rate...yes, Josh's last season and a half exceed even Neyland's lifetime win percentage. And John Barnhill, who filled in for Neyland during World War II, he was slightly above Josh at .846 while leading the Vols.

The trolls amongst us are going to point out that Heupel's win rate is only valid if you include that 7-6 first season. I'll explain why it's not really important, but for their edification, if you DO include every game Heupel has coached the Vols, his win rate is still .719, still up at a very respectable level.

So why isn't his first season important to include? Because over time, it will disappear into the background. Example: say you take your car to the Bristol speedway, and pay to drive 50 laps around the track. Your goal is an average speed of 130 mph. So you jump in your car and get going. The first lap is disappointing, because you spend the whole thing getting up to speed: average, just 75 mph. The second lap is much better, at 120. The third lap is 125. Fourth is 128. And from there out, every lap comes out at either 131 or 132. Do you meet your goal?

Well, after just three laps it looks like there's no way you're gonna. The average of 75, 120, and 125 mph is only about 107. That first lap at 75 really threw off your average. But at the end of 10 laps, things are looking better: average is now 124. And after 50 laps of running mostly between 131 and 132, your average speed comes out at 129.94. Rounds off to 130. You made it!

That first lap is called an outlier. It doesn't fit the pattern of the rest of your race. And as the race goes on, it becomes less and less significant to the whole.

That's how Heupel's first season is going to fade into the background over time.

Earlly indications are, this man is a .800+ coach. If he can do it before the high-level recruiting even kicks in, he can do it his entire tenure at Tennesee.

We're gonna win championships with him.

Go Vols!


p.s. Even if this season ends up at a rather middling 9-3 (say 10-3 with a bowl win), that will still give Josh a two-year win rate of .808. That's just above Nick Saban's lifetime rate of .802. We got ourselves a coach.

well good - -

 

[DiderotsGhost]

Mizzou is a mirage, like Kentucky.

Talent matters and we severely out talent both of those teams. We can definitely lose both games (and our performance under CJH on the road is inconsistent at best), but a loss in either of those games should be more shocking than the loss to SCAR last year.

We're certainly capable of beating them, but Brady Cook is one of the best QBs in the SEC. And given that Milton has underperformed significantly thus far and the game is in Columbia, that's far from an easy win. Sure, our "talent" is better than theirs on average, but at the most important position, they are much better than us.

I'm more skeptical of Kentucky than Mizzou. Kentucky feasted on a weak early season schedule and is very 1-dimensional.

 

[rocketskates]

Heupel is a great coach, but I worry people are going to be down on him if we finish the season 8-4. And it's more likely than people realize (Mizzou is pretty damn good this year and we play them on the road).

I don't think people understand that, to some extent, this season was inevitable. We had a load of offensive talent when Heupel came in, but we had an effective dead recruiting class in 2020. And part of what we're seeing is the impact of that. Not enough O-line depth. Offense is filled with very young players and we lost all our best players to the draft (Hooker, Hyatt, D-Wright, Tillman).

Overall, Heupel has greatly outperformed given the circumstances he inherited, and I think he's the guy long-term. The fact that people have all but forgotten the situation he walked into is a testament to just how good he is. Most coaches would not have won nearly as many games as Heupel has won in the same circumstance.

All day long. I am 100% behind Heupel, but I expected a drop off this season. Look at all of the players that were drafted last year.

 

[Tman44]

Get this: over the past year and a half, Josh Heupel has led the Vols to 16 wins and 3 losses. That's a win rate of .842.

How good is .842? Well, Johnny Majors can't touch it; he ran .645 at Tennessee (his lifetime win rate was lower than that). Even Phillip Fulmer can't get near it; he had a win rate of .745.

There are only two coaches in Tennessee history who come close. The General had a .829 rate...yes, Josh's last season and a half exceed even Neyland's lifetime win percentage. And John Barnhill, who filled in for Neyland during World War II, he was slightly above Josh at .846 while leading the Vols.

The trolls amongst us are going to point out that Heupel's win rate is only valid if you include that 7-6 first season. I'll explain why it's not really important, but for their edification, if you DO include every game Heupel has coached the Vols, his win rate is still .719, still up at a very respectable level.

So why isn't his first season important to include? Because over time, it will disappear into the background. Example: say you take your car to the Bristol speedway, and pay to drive 50 laps around the track. Your goal is an average speed of 130 mph. So you jump in your car and get going. The first lap is disappointing, because you spend the whole thing getting up to speed: average, just 75 mph. The second lap is much better, at 120. The third lap is 125. Fourth is 128. And from there out, every lap comes out at either 131 or 132. Do you meet your goal?

Well, after just three laps it looks like there's no way you're gonna. The average of 75, 120, and 125 mph is only about 107. That first lap at 75 really threw off your average. But at the end of 10 laps, things are looking better: average is now 124. And after 50 laps of running mostly between 131 and 132, your average speed comes out at 129.94. Rounds off to 130. You made it!

That first lap is called an outlier. It doesn't fit the pattern of the rest of your race. And as the race goes on, it becomes less and less significant to the whole.

That's how Heupel's first season is going to fade into the background over time.

Earlly indications are, this man is a .800+ coach. If he can do it before the high-level recruiting even kicks in, he can do it his entire tenure at Tennesee.

We're gonna win championships with him.

Go Vols!


p.s. Even if this season ends up at a rather middling 9-3 (say 10-3 with a bowl win), that will still give Josh a two-year win rate of .808. That's just above Nick Saban's lifetime rate of .802. We got ourselves a coach.

If you used Talladega instead of Bristol in your analogy, the average differentials would be much greater.

 

[VOLINVONORE]

Heupel is a great coach, but I worry people are going to be down on him if we finish the season 8-4. And it's more likely than people realize (Mizzou is pretty damn good this year and we play them on the road).

I don't think people understand that, to some extent, this season was inevitable. We had a load of offensive talent when Heupel came in, but we had an effective dead recruiting class in 2020. And part of what we're seeing is the impact of that. Not enough O-line depth. Offense is filled with very young players and we lost all our best players to the draft (Hooker, Hyatt, D-Wright, Tillman).

Overall, Heupel has greatly outperformed given the circumstances he inherited, and I think he's the guy long-term. The fact that people have all but forgotten the situation he walked into is a testament to just how good he is. Most coaches would not have won nearly as many games as Heupel has won in the same circumstance.

If we get good QB play we can win out If we don't, we can be 8-4. We will see what happens.

 

[Clad in Big Orange]

The overconfidence toward playing at MO and at UK is weird. We aren’t so superior in talent that the Vols can just show up and win. I think a lot of people felt that way about the Florida game and the ‘22 SC game. Go ahead and expect this offense to be running like a well-oiled machine if you want. I don’t.

 

[volfan411]

Get this: over the past year and a half, Josh Heupel has led the Vols to 16 wins and 3 losses. That's a win rate of .842.

How good is .842? Well, Johnny Majors can't touch it; he ran .645 at Tennessee (his lifetime win rate was lower than that). Even Phillip Fulmer can't get near it; he had a win rate of .745.

There are only two coaches in Tennessee history who come close. The General had a .829 rate...yes, Josh's last season and a half exceed even Neyland's lifetime win percentage. And John Barnhill, who filled in for Neyland during World War II, he was slightly above Josh at .846 while leading the Vols.

The trolls amongst us are going to point out that Heupel's win rate is only valid if you include that 7-6 first season. I'll explain why it's not really important, but for their edification, if you DO include every game Heupel has coached the Vols, his win rate is still .719, still up at a very respectable level.

So why isn't his first season important to include? Because over time, it will disappear into the background. Example: say you take your car to the Bristol speedway, and pay to drive 50 laps around the track. Your goal is an average speed of 130 mph. So you jump in your car and get going. The first lap is disappointing, because you spend the whole thing getting up to speed: average, just 75 mph. The second lap is much better, at 120. The third lap is 125. Fourth is 128. And from there out, every lap comes out at either 131 or 132. Do you meet your goal?

Well, after just three laps it looks like there's no way you're gonna. The average of 75, 120, and 125 mph is only about 107. That first lap at 75 really threw off your average. But at the end of 10 laps, things are looking better: average is now 124. And after 50 laps of running mostly between 131 and 132, your average speed comes out at 129.94. Rounds off to 130. You made it!

That first lap is called an outlier. It doesn't fit the pattern of the rest of your race. And as the race goes on, it becomes less and less significant to the whole.

That's how Heupel's first season is going to fade into the background over time.

Earlly indications are, this man is a .800+ coach. If he can do it before the high-level recruiting even kicks in, he can do it his entire tenure at Tennesee.

We're gonna win championships with him.

Go Vols!


p.s. Even if this season ends up at a rather middling 9-3 (say 10-3 with a bowl win), that will still give Josh a two-year win rate of .808. That's just above Nick Saban's lifetime rate of .802. We got ourselves a coach.

And he is 5-1 this season with what most on here think is QB who shouldn’t even be playing peewee football.

 

[TNStudMuffin]

Heupel is a great coach, but I worry people are going to be down on him if we finish the season 8-4. And it's more likely than people realize (Mizzou is pretty damn good this year and we play them on the road).

I don't think people understand that, to some extent, this season was inevitable. We had a load of offensive talent when Heupel came in, but we had an effective dead recruiting class in 2020. And part of what we're seeing is the impact of that. Not enough O-line depth. Offense is filled with very young players and we lost all our best players to the draft (Hooker, Hyatt, D-Wright, Tillman).

Overall, Heupel has greatly outperformed given the circumstances he inherited, and I think he's the guy long-term. The fact that people have all but forgotten the situation he walked into is a testament to just how good he is. Most coaches would not have won nearly as many games as Heupel has won in the same circumstance.

I don't think it was inevitable. If he would have given up on Milton and tried like hell to get even a competent (Not even what you would call good) SEC level QB, I think things would be much better off on offense. And then I think we would have a real shot at a repeat 11-2 season.

 

[GetYouSomeofThat]

He's good enough to know his best weapons are his RB's and put the ball in their hands. He's tiptoed the playcalling around Milton too for obvious reasons that keep showing up every week. In other words he's smart enough to not try and fit the square peg in the round hole like a lot of coaches do.

The WRs are as big of a problem in the lack of a passing game as Milton is.

 

[Delmar]

He's good enough to know his best weapons are his RB's and put the ball in their hands. He's tiptoed the playcalling around Milton too for obvious reasons that keep showing up every week. In other words he's smart enough to not try and fit the square peg in the round hole like a lot of coaches do.

That’s why I think he’s doing a great job this year. He’s riding the running game and a much improved defense and doing his best to mask Joe’s and the wide receiver deficiencies. Joe is not Hendon Hooker and the WR’s are not helping him. They aren’t getting separation and Joe is having to force some balls. And when they do get separation, there have been issues with drops (Keyton especially). Josh is dealing with what he has.

 

[37620VOL]

Let's finish the year and use the numbers from 2 full seasons. I remember doing similar comparisons during similar good runs by Butch and Pruitt.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

The overconfidence toward playing at MO and at UK is weird. We aren’t so superior in talent that the Vols can just show up and win. I think a lot of people felt that way about the Florida game and the ‘22 SC game. Go ahead and expect this offense to be running like a well-oiled machine if you want. I don’t.

See, that's the thing. I think most folks who expect us to handle Mizzou and Kentucky without much problem, they feel confident we can do it IN SPITE OF a clunky, mis-firing passing attack. No one that I'm aware of is thinking we have a well-oiled machine. We just have confidence in our coaches, our play-calling, our run game, our defense, and our special teams to offset that clunky pass attack.

It's not over-confidence if it's well-earned confidence.

Go Vols!

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Let's finish the year and use the numbers from 2 full seasons. I remember doing similar comparisons during similar good runs by Butch and Pruitt.

Did that in the OP, actually. Projected us out to a 9-3 finish (10-3 with bowl win).

You can project it differently if you wish, come up with your own numbers.

But sure, I'm confident we'll be having this conversation again in the off-season. What, you think Heupel is going to lay an egg and go 2-5 or 3-4 in the back half of the season?