State of our program: Expectations and Achivement

[General Jack]

I've been thinking about this for a while now, how to assess our program since our glory years of the mid - late 90s...? What I've come up with follows...


What is the most objective way to assess the state of our program? I think it is to factor out emotion and concentrate on our performance through measureable results using the following logic:

1. Set expectations

2. Measure our success against those expectations

3. If not acceptable, define what has to happen to achieve those expectations going forward



The first question is, what are reasonable expectations to have as a Tennessee fan? We have a great program, generally regarded as one of the 10 best historically in college football. We also have tremendous fan support and financial resources. Working against us, we play in the most competitive conference in the nation, and have other top flight programs in our division (Florida & Georgia). Also, our in-state talent lags that of our primary rivals.

Given the above, reasonable expectations are:

· Appearance in the SEC Championship Game between once every 3 years and 3 times a decade, or 3.0 - 3.3 times average every 10 years. And once we get there, we need to win, but losses will happen occasionally, so lets say,
· 2 SEC Championships every 10 years. This might be pushing it slightly given there are 6 legitimate contenders year in year out (Tennessee, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Alabama), and Arkansas is stepping up. Time will tell if South Carolina becomes a contender. However, we are Tennessee and should set the bar high.
· With regards to national titles, the most reasonable expectation in my opinion is to be in the mix for a national title a few times a decade - if you're in the mix on a recurring basis, and winning SEC Championships, you'll get one every once in a while.

So, now that we have the expectation of what our success should be over a 10 year period, lets compare it to the most recent 10 year period:

• 4 SEC Championship game appearance - Met expectations
• 2 SEC Championships - Met expectations
• 1 National Title - Bonus

Now, here's the problem. A significant amount of time has passed since our real success, with the achievement of the majority of our goals occurring back in the 1997 and 1998 seasons (2 SEC Championship game appearances, 2 SEC Titles, and our National Titles). After next year, 1997 rolls off so, assuming no SEC Championship, then we will not have met expectations. We have had some great wins in the past several years, but we have not consistently achieved the true goals... championships...

So, in my mind, there are 2 things that need to happen within the next 12 months or so…

1. Land an outstanding recruiting class - if not, we face a severe risk of continuing the middle tier SEC status for several more years.
2. Win the SEC, or at a minimum, seriously compete for the SEC East title; i.e. at a minimum finish in a tie for the East; being 2 games back like we were this year will not be acceptable

I have always liked Fulmer, I love the fact he's from Tennessee, played for Tennessee, and is loyal to Tennessee, but without a great recruiting class this year and competing for the SEC title next year, there would be absolutely without a doubt, that our program has seriously declined. So at that point, we would have to start seriously considering looking for a new HBC.

 

[WillisWG]

whew! not unreasonable but in today's SEC enviroment will be extremely difficult to accomplish ...let's face it in the 90s there were two programs that were the elite: Florida & Tennessee. Using the 90s to establish expectations for the 00s and out may not work...as you pointed out in the SEC we have 6 or 7 teams that can compete.

 

[kidbourbon]

whew! not unreasonable but in today's SEC enviroment will extremely difficult to accomplish ...let's face it in the 90s there were two programs that were the elite: Florida & Tennessee. Using the 90s to establish expectations for the 00s and out may not work...as you pointed out in the SEC we have 6 or 7 teams that can compete.

But what was so special about those 90's teams that made us great? If we agree that it wasn't a mere accident, that it wasn't just that a bunch of really good players randomly decided to go to tennessee, then why shouldn't expectations be set to re-attain the elite status of the 90's?

 

[OrangeSquare]

But what was so special about those 90's teams that made us great? If we agree that it wasn't a mere accident, that it wasn't just that a bunch of really good players randomly decided to go to tennessee, then why shouldn't expectations be set to re-attain the elite status of the 90's?

It is unrealistic to compare College Football today, to what it was "in the 90's". There is so much more parody in College Football these days. "In the 90's" you couldn't imagine programs like Florida St and Miami with the records they have today. Some thing with Tennessee last year, the lean Nebraska years, etc, etc.

The game is simply different than it was in the 90's. If you focus on trying to do what you did in the 90's, there are going to be other programs pass you by.

You have to adapt to the way that the game has changed. I think last season was a result of Tennessee and Fulmer trying to do what they had always done. I think this season we have seen changes made in the way Tennessee plays football.

I think we will continue to see Tennessee adapt and regain some success, but I won't be comparing it to earlier years, I will simply enjoy it as it happens.

 

[General Jack]

whew! not unreasonable but in today's SEC enviroment will extremely difficult to accomplish ...let's face it in the 90s there were two programs that were the elite: Florida & Tennessee. Using the 90s to establish expectations for the 00s and out may not work...as you pointed out in the SEC we have 6 or 7 teams that can compete.

So you are questioning whether 3 SECCG appearances and 2 SEC titles every 10 years is a reasonable expectation?

I don't think 3 SECCG appearances is unreasonable. That could equate to UT, UGA and UF each having 3 a decade, and allows for one for a sleeper - or an extra for one of the big 3.

2 SEC Championships is slightly more a stretch since we've had 13 in the past 100 years or so - but I don't think it is an unreasonable goal.

 

[WillisWG]

So you are questioning whether 3 SECCG appearances and 2 SEC titles every 10 years is a reasonable expectation?

I don't think 3 SECCG appearances is unreasonable. That could equate to UT, UGA and UF each having 3 a decade, and allows for one for a sleeper - or an extra for one of the big 3.

2 SEC Championships is slightly more a stretch since we've had 13 in the past 100 years or so - but I don't think it is an unreasonable goal.

Agree with you on the SEC Champs...

in the E only three teams UT, UGA and UF have gone to Atlanta..in the W five teams have gone. So if the expectation is that in the E only UT, UGA and UF will ever compete or a sleeper would only take one every ten years then I would say it would not be unreasonable and I believe I said it was not unreasonable. But a few on this board believe Spurrier will bring USC into the mix.

 

[TravisHenryCBlockedMe]

There is nothing wrong with high expectations. I feel that a lot of people have dropped their expectations because of the past 6 years and accept a 3-loss season as good.

 

[WillisWG]

There is nothing wrong with high expectations. I feel that a lot of people have dropped their expectations because of the past 6 years and accept a 3-loss season as good.

Absolutely correct..nothing wrong with high expectations. But could the 90s have inflated the expectations? Did UF/UT fans become spoiled fans because we had the dominate teams?

Before adding one more game to the season and changing how we determine the SECC a 10-2 or 9-3 season might be consided as good season depending on who you had played and what bowl offer was tendered. Many a SEC season ended with 2 or 3 teams as Co-Champs. Made the discussions at the local watering hole interesting. Trust me I like the change to SECCG...makes the bragging rites hard to dispute.

 

[General Jack]

Absolutely correct..nothing wrong with high expectations. But could the 90s have inflated the expectations? Did UF/UT fans become spoiled fans because we had the dominate teams?

Before adding one more game to the season and changing how we determine the SECC a 10-2 or 9-3 season might be consided as good season depending on who you had played and what bowl offer was tendered. Many a SEC season ended with 2 or 3 teams as Co-Champs. Made the discussions at the local watering hole interesting. Trust me I like the change to SECCG...makes the bragging rites hard to dispute.

My perception is that the hunger and drive inherent in Fulmer and his teams had been lost since 1998 and getting to the mountain top. Complacency appeared to have set it. While I think last year was a wake up call, its obviously going to take more than 1 year for us to make up lost ground.

This year's recruiting process is hugely important. We won't get back to the top anytime soon without the horses.

 

[WillisWG]

My perception is that the hunger and drive inherent in Fulmer and his teams had been lost since 1998 and getting to the mountain top. Complacency appeared to have set it. While I think last year was a wake up call, its obviously going to take more than 1 year for us to make up lost ground.

This year's recruiting process is hugely important. We won't get back to the top anytime soon without the horses.

agree with you on the recruiting issue....I thought we looked much smaller on D than a couple of teams we played.

 

[kidbourbon]

It is unrealistic to compare College Football today, to what it was "in the 90's". There is so much more parody in College Football these days. "In the 90's" you couldn't imagine programs like Florida St and Miami with the records they have today. Some thing with Tennessee last year, the lean Nebraska years, etc, etc.

The game is simply different than it was in the 90's. If you focus on trying to do what you did in the 90's, there are going to be other programs pass you by.

You have to adapt to the way that the game has changed. I think last season was a result of Tennessee and Fulmer trying to do what they had always done. I think this season we have seen changes made in the way Tennessee plays football.

I think we will continue to see Tennessee adapt and regain some success, but I won't be comparing it to earlier years, I will simply enjoy it as it happens.

1) what you're talking about is a shift in power, not parity
2) it's parity, not parody

 

[rockydoc]

It is unrealistic to compare College Football today, to what it was "in the 90's". There is so much more parody in College Football these days. "In the 90's" you couldn't imagine programs like Florida St and Miami with the records they have today. Some thing with Tennessee last year, the lean Nebraska years, etc, etc.

The game is simply different than it was in the 90's. If you focus on trying to do what you did in the 90's, there are going to be other programs pass you by.

You have to adapt to the way that the game has changed. I think last season was a result of Tennessee and Fulmer trying to do what they had always done. I think this season we have seen changes made in the way Tennessee plays football.

I think we will continue to see Tennessee adapt and regain some success, but I won't be comparing it to earlier years, I will simply enjoy it as it happens.

I don't agree O2. The 25/85 scholarship rule has been in place at least 20-25 years(correct me if I'm wrong). What you have is some teams down (USC, Texas and Oklahoma etc) in the 90's that now are back up, thanks to very good HC hires. Some teams that were up in the 90's (Miami, Tennessee, Alabama, Colorado, etc.) are now down. [By down I mean not in the top 10. I'm sure you are very happy to be #22 in the current polls.]

In the SEC, you have an influx of new head coaches that are equal or better than Spurrier and your idol....Saban, Meyer, Miles, Tuberville, Richt. Gone are the Ray Goff's, Sparkey Woods and Curley Hallmans etc.

 

[GAVol]

I don't agree O2. The 25/85 scholarship rule has been in place at least 20-25 years(correct me if I'm wrong).

I don't think that's right. The 85 scholarship rule is something that has been implemented in the past 5 years or so I think.

I'll check on that to verify.

 

[kptvol]

I don't agree O2. The 25/85 scholarship rule has been in place at least 20-25 years(correct me if I'm wrong). What you have is some teams down (USC, Texas and Oklahoma etc) in the 90's that now are back up, thanks to very good HC hires. Some teams that were up in the 90's (Miami, Tennessee, Alabama, Colorado, etc.) are now down. [By down I mean not in the top 10. I'm sure you are very happy to be #22 in the current polls.]

In the SEC, you have an influx of new head coaches that are equal or better than Spurrier and your idol....Saban, Meyer, Miles, Tuberville, Richt. Gone are the Ray Goff's, Sparkey Woods and Curley Hallmans etc.

It's pretty early to proclaim any of those guys as equal to or better than Spurrier. Urban Meyer and Les Miles? What have they accomplished?

 

[rockydoc]

I don't think that's right. The 85 scholarship rule is something that has been implemented in the past 5 years or so I think.

I'll check on that to verify.

I could be wrong but this board is a veritable smorgasboard of football info. and any error won't last long unnoticed.

 

[GAVol]

I don't think that's right. The 85 scholarship rule is something that has been implemented in the past 5 years or so I think.

I'll check on that to verify.

OK, I was a little off. The scholarship numbers were incrementally brought down and reached 85 in the mid 90s.

 

[Liper]

I don't think it's the scholarships but who's on scholarship.

In the SEC there are better coaches. More teams are capable. However, I also don't see a great team this year. So what's left is a bunch of top 20 teams that are good enough to beat people but bad enough to lose a couple.

Throw LSU, FL, AUB, TN, ARK in a hat (assuming healthy players) and pick 'em. I don't see that much difference.

 

[rockydoc]

I don't think it's the scholarships but who's on scholarship.

In the SEC there are better coaches. More teams are capable. However, I also don't see a great team this year. So what's left is a bunch of top 20 teams that are good enough to beat people but bad enough to lose a couple.

Throw LSU, FL, AUB, TN, ARK in a hat (assuming healthy players) and pick 'em. I don't see that much difference.

IMO, looking at the SEC this year, our 97, 98, 99, and 01 teams would have run the table undefeated in the SEC. (Well maybe not the fathead-looking-to-the -pros-99 bunch)!

 

[kptvol]

IMO, looking at the SEC this year, our 97, 98, 99, and 01 teams would have run the table undefeated in the SEC. (Well maybe not the fathead-looking-to-the -pros-99 bunch)!

I don't think that was the problem so much as horrific offensive play-calling. That season should have been a strong indicator that Randy Sanders was not what UT needed. We were more talented than every team we played that year.

 

[Vercingetorix]

There is nothing wrong with high expectations. I feel that a lot of people have dropped their expectations because of the past 6 years and accept a 3-loss season as good.

Exactly. Our expectations have been lowered.

I don't know if I could quantify my expectations quite as specifically as the original poster, but for me, here's what it boils down to:

- I do not expect us to have the third best program in our own division, which is where we are now. I don't expect to finish two games back, and eliminated by early November.

- I do not expect us to be totally physically overwhelmed on both sides of the line of scrimmage, EVER, which is what has happened against every good team we've played this year. I expect to compete in every game. Being totally blown out of a game is something that shouldn't happen more often than once every three or four years, at most; right now, that's happening about once a year.

- I expect us to win at home. Our record in big games in Neyland this decade is totally unacceptable. I'm almost to the point where I'd rather play a big game on the road.

- I expect to go to a good bowl game every year, with a BCS game every few years. The Peach Bowl and its ilk ought to be an aberration, not the typical destination.

- I expect to play in and win the SECCG every few years. I'm not going to specify how often for either -- if we are the elite team that I think Tennessee should strive to be, this will take care of itself.

- I expect to be mentioned every few years in the national championship discussion. I don't expect to be in the final game every year, obviously; I just expect to be part of the conversation about who's going to be in it every so often. Maybe two or three times a decade. I don't expect to be hoping that other SEC teams make it into the BCS so that we can avoid playing in the Music City Bowl.

I think that's it. Basically I expect us to be the top 10 team we have been historically, rather than just being a "darn good" team. "You can't spell Citrus without UT," said Spurrier; that was an insult at one point, but it's been half a decade since we've even been able to get back there.

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

It is unrealistic to compare College Football today, to what it was "in the 90's". There is so much more parody in College Football these days. "In the 90's" you couldn't imagine programs like Florida St and Miami with the records they have today. Some thing with Tennessee last year, the lean Nebraska years, etc, etc.

The game is simply different than it was in the 90's. If you focus on trying to do what you did in the 90's, there are going to be other programs pass you by.

You have to adapt to the way that the game has changed. I think last season was a result of Tennessee and Fulmer trying to do what they had always done. I think this season we have seen changes made in the way Tennessee plays football.

I think we will continue to see Tennessee adapt and regain some success, but I won't be comparing it to earlier years, I will simply enjoy it as it happens.

Holy mackrel!!! I never thought I'd read anything remotely critical of CPF in one of your posts OS. Welcome to reality.:salute:

 

[85Destiny]

But what was so special about those 90's teams that made us great? If we agree that it wasn't a mere accident, that it wasn't just that a bunch of really good players randomly decided to go to tennessee, then why shouldn't expectations be set to re-attain the elite status of the 90's?

The other teams were not as good as they are now.

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

If UGA, UF, AU and LSU can be considered elite programs then IMO UT should be able to attain the same status. All it takes is the right coach and the right players. No more excuses.

 

[General Jack]

Exactly. Our expectations have been lowered.

I don't know if I could quantify my expectations quite as specifically as the original poster, but for me, here's what it boils down to:

- I do not expect us to have the third best program in our own division, which is where we are now. I don't expect to finish two games back, and eliminated by early November.

- I do not expect us to be totally physically overwhelmed on both sides of the line of scrimmage, EVER, which is what has happened against every good team we've played this year. I expect to compete in every game. Being totally blown out of a game is something that shouldn't happen more often than once every three or four years, at most; right now, that's happening about once a year.

- I expect us to win at home. Our record in big games in Neyland this decade is totally unacceptable. I'm almost to the point where I'd rather play a big game on the road.

- I expect to go to a good bowl game every year, with a BCS game every few years. The Peach Bowl and its ilk ought to be an aberration, not the typical destination. "You can't spell Citrus without UT," but we haven't even been able to get back there in half a decade.

- I expect to play in and win the SECCG every few years. I'm not going to specify how often for either -- if we are the elite team that I think Tennessee should strive to be, this will take care of itself.

- I expect to be mentioned every few years in the national championship discussion. I don't expect to be in the final game every year, obviously; I just expect to be part of the conversation about who's going to be in it every so often. Maybe two or three times a decade. I don't expect to be hoping that other SEC teams make it into the BCS so that we can avoid playing in the Music City Bowl.

I think that's it. Basically I expect us to be the top 10 team we have been historically, rather than just being a "darn good" team. "You can't spell Citrus without UT," said Spurrier; that was an insult at one point, but it's been half a decade since we've even been able to get back there.

I agree 100%.

 

[volinbham]

If UGA, UF, AU and LSU can be considered elite programs then IMO UT should be able to attain the same status. All it takes is the right coach and the right players. No more excuses.

I don't know that I would consider UGA, LSU or Auburn elite programs. All are having their best periods in quite a while but UGA is clearly struggling, Auburn has a 5 loss season in it's recent past plus a huge bowl loss last year, LSU has massive talent but may end up with the same record we have.

In other words, they've each won the big stuff more recently than us but they haven't been consistently better than us over the last 10 years.

In other words, too soon to refer them as elite (or to consider their coaches to be elite).