Last Vol Team to Overachieve?

#26
#26
strongtower said:
They actually came out ranked #10
Click to expand...

I didn't remember them being ranked top 10. But if they were that's still overachieving IMO. The effing media tried everyday possible to keep them from playing in the NC that year. Their schedule was brutal as well.

Edit: you are 100% correct. The AP had them 10 preseason. It seams as if I remember polls having us from the 13-17 range. Even if that were the case, AP is more credible IMO. You're right, I'm wrong. Never ever ever tell my wife I just admitted that to you, LOL.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
coffeevol said:
I may get killed for this but I think 2009 under Kiffin we really did better than I thought, We pounded UGA and destroyed USCe on Halloween. Really had me excited for the future until that cold cold night....In Butch we trust.
Click to expand...

Funny how that worked.......and with a team 99% Fulmer's players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#31
#31
That's always been the heartbreaker for me as at Tennessee fan: watching our teams UNDERachieve on a regular basis. Showing up (or, in reality, not showing up) to two straight bowl games against ACC teams and getting the living crap kicked out of us. Knocking out LSU's starting QB in the first half of the SEC Championship Game in 2001 before making his backup look like Joe Montana in his prime during the second half and squandering a chance to play for the national title. Laying down like dogs to Florida on a yearly basis ... even when we had comparable talent. The entire Derek Dooley era. It's been painful.

Oh, well ... here's to better times to come with Coach Jones at the helm. Go Vols!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#32
#32
Rifleman said:
Recently, Dave Hart said that he believed that we will overachieve under Coach Jones. This made me wonder. What was the last Vol team that truly overachieved, VolNation? Second question, is Hart correct and, if so, what will that mean record-wise in 2013?

For my part, I think we have underachieved for a long time. Even our BCS Championship team did not really overachieve, in my opinion. I really think they were the most talented team that year. I would say the 1985 team that won the '86 Sugar Bowl, with Daryl Dickey at QB, is the only one that pops out immediately.

As to what overachieving might look like: I put together a table which shows the total Rivals recruiting points for the last 5 classes: 2009-2013.

Obviously, we've lost a lot of our recruits. Auburn has as well. Still, this is one interesting gauge to determine the relative status of each program.

TALE OF THE RECRUITING TAPE: 2009-2013


Obviously, Bama. :sick:

Interestingly, Florida is right there, with nearly as high a percentage of 4 & 5 star recruits.

Oregon and South Carolina jump out at me as teams that have probably overachieved.

Obviously, Vandy is an overachiever, and not just at sucking for once.

I think most of us agree that playing up to our recruiting ranking, considering the player attrition, would be overachieving. That would mean an 8-4 season and a bowl trip.

I would not consider 7-5 overachieving because one of the teams above us in recruiting, Auburn, has gone through a mini program implosion. However, if we can get the 8th win in a bowl I would still say we overachieved.

6-6 would be a meeting-the-most-basic-expectations kind of season. I agree with Hart and say we do better.

Note: two of our opponents have no ranked players per Rivals and are not listed. If we lose to one of those teams I will spontaneously combust.

It might be interesting to run these numbers again, with attrition, draftees and injuries subtracted from the totals. It would be best to do in late August once actual game rosters are set. Hopefully we don't lose anyone between now and then!
Click to expand...



The 2007 team. We won the East with Austin Rogers, Brad Cottom, Arian Foster, etc. etc. Of course, we lost big time in the S.E.C. Championship game but I had no expectations of us even getting to the S.E.C. Championship that season...
 
#33
#33
Rudy123 said:
The 2007 team. We won the East with Austin Rogers, Brad Cottom, Arian Foster, etc. etc. Of course, we lost big time in the S.E.C. Championship game but I had no expectations of us even getting to the S.E.C. Championship that season...
Click to expand...



Lucas Taylor, J. Briscoe, Dan Williams, Ainge, DeAngelo Willihgham, Antonio Reynolds were on the 2007 team.


We started the season with a loss to Cal. in Berkley.....
 
#34
#34
I'd go with 2007.

Don't think you can strictly look at average recruiting ranking, because of factors like attrition, and certain prospects not working out. Also, even looking at recruiting rankings, they should probably be weighted towards the Junior and Senior classes.

The 2007 squad was expected to finish 3rd in the SEC East and defied all expectations; nearly winning an SEC title. That team also improved as the year went on.

Before that, I'd go with 2004 and 2001. I still think there's a legit case to be made that we were the best team in the nation in 2001 (or at least, it's a close call vs Florida). The SEC was at a disadvantage back then, because we played much tougher schedules than Big 10, Pac-10, etc. If we lost 1 or 2 games on an extremely difficult schedule, while a Big 10 team lost 0 games on weak competition, they always were ranked over us, even though they might have lost 2 or 3 games playing the same schedule as us. Perception has changed since around 2006, so that pollsters have increasingly acknowledged (to some extent) that SEC teams play tougher schedules.

On the other end of things, I think we've underachieved since that 2007 season. To underachieve for 5 straight years is pretty bad.

For 2013, I think expectations are pretty low. Somewhere between 5-7 and 7-5 is what's probably expected. If we were to go 8-4, that would be overachieving.
 
Last edited:
#35
#35
Rudy123 said:
The 2007 team. We won the East with Austin Rogers, Brad Cottom, Arian Foster, etc. etc. Of course, we lost big time in the S.E.C. Championship game but I had no expectations of us even getting to the S.E.C. Championship that season...
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that having a chance to tie/ take the lead late is not losing big time.
 
#37
#37
The last team to overachieve was probably at least a year or two ago.
 
#39
#39
Special Ed said:
Why do you youngsters always overlook the Neyland years? That's the era that put Tennessee football into the record books to stay.
Click to expand...


And a gallon of milk?...was a NICKEL!
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#41
#41
Does everyone agree that 8-5 after a bowl game would qualify as overachieving for this season?

Does anyone think the bar should be set lower or higher?

Obviously, we all want the bar higher, but I think 8-5 would be overachieving considering our schedule.
 
#42
#42
Rifleman said:
Does everyone agree that 8-5 after a bowl game would qualify as overachieving for this season?

Does anyone think the bar should be set lower or higher?

Obviously, we all want the bar higher, but I think 8-5 would be overachieving considering our schedule.
Click to expand...
That is the record that Dooley's Year Zero team would have had , if the LSU and No. Carolina games had ended when they ended the first time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#43
#43
1972 Grad said:
That is the record that Dooley's Year Zero team would have had , if the LSU and No. Carolina games had ended when they ended the first time.
Click to expand...

The LSU game was his fault. The UNC game not so much. That was year zero and Dooley didn't count it so neither should we.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#44
#44
de3cls said:
The '09 team gets my vote.
Click to expand...

'09 was mixed. The UCLA, Ole Miss and Auburn games stand out as much as the near win at Alabama and the USCe and UGA beat downs. I do think they over-achieved with the o-line and linebackers we had.
 
#45
#45
Rifleman said:
Does everyone agree that 8-5 after a bowl game would qualify as overachieving for this season?

Does anyone think the bar should be set lower or higher?

Obviously, we all want the bar higher, but I think 8-5 would be overachieving considering our schedule.
Click to expand...


That's actually about what I think we'll do this year. Well....let me say I think we'll win seven regular season games. We could win or lose the bowl leaving us 7-6 or 8-5. 8-5 to me would be slightly overachieving. But I think this squad is gonna be a little better than some think. IMO our two best units will be the offensive and defensive lines. And no I'm not getting into the 9-10 win BS talk. But I truly think this team can win 7 regular season games. With an upset over Oregon or UGA. Both have lost a fair amount from their defensive front seven. People are completely underestimating our offensive line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#47
#47
thebjd said:
The LSU game was his fault. The UNC game not so much. That was year zero and Dooley didn't count it so neither should we.
Click to expand...
Ultimately, because he was at the top, it is his fault, but that fubar goes to somebody on the defensive staff. I have heard Chuck Smith, but I don't know.
 
#49
#49
1972 Grad said:
Ultimately, because he was at the top, it is his fault, but that fubar goes to somebody on the defensive staff. I have heard Chuck Smith, but I don't know.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the week before against UAB we had to burn several TOs because of personel issues. He vowed after the UAB game he would get it fixed. I remember him specifically stating that. Then the same thing cost us the LSU game. I knew right then we were in for a long tough ride under Dooley.
 
#50
#50
This debate is always interesting, and it is always interesting to see how skewed the perception is to the reality.

Even during the Decade of Dominance, we were never the most talented team in the league. Yes, we were far closer to the top of the SEC talent-wise, but we were always #2 - #4. Some teams did underachieve during that time (Goff GA being the most glaring example - he had NFL teams in Athens during his tenure). Florida was always more talented than we were during that time span. They had more quality NFL'ers, more All-SEC, more All-Americans, etc. I think we had more draftees, but they had more who had solid NFL careers (clearly, we had our fair share of those too, but they did have more).

Another misconception is the 2009 team. That team was LOADED with NFL talent (especially compared to the last few years). It actually UNDERPERFORMED by at least one game under Kiffin.

The point is, almost every visit to the SECCG was an overachieving year, even in 1998. 2004 and 2007 are exceptional overachieving years. In 2004 we lost twice to by far the best SEC team of the decade (and its not even close if you review their roster, and where those players are now), and actually played an undefeated Auburn team closer than any other team by miles. We were the only team to score more than 20 points on that team that year if I remember.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top