Does it? It's true, we had a long period from 1989-2001 in which we were one of college football's most consistent winners. Florida of course was also strong, and Georgia was in a post-Vince Dooley retirement funk, which aided our cause significantly because we got a lot of that State's best players onto our roster. It is worth noting also that this period of sustained success came after a long period of stability and program building. We had a great year like 85' now and then but there was a lot of 7, 8 win seasons in there, but we bided our time and built a stable program and then stepped into the conference power vacuum in the 90's when it presented itself.
With that said, the 90's are not our modern norm. We were 4th in overall wins in the 90's but that is our only decade in the last 6 in which we were top 10 in wins. Georgia and Florida on the other hand have been in the top 10 in wins 3 of the last 4 decades and 2 of the last 3 respectively. In the 47 seasons in which college football has been fully integrated, which as great and as needed as that was, as a practical matter it must be recognized, substantially altered the fundamental recruiting calculus against the State of Tennessee in favor of Florida and Georgia, for the foreseeable future. Since that time, Tennessee is 18th in wins, Florida is 10th, and Georgia is 7th.
Am I saying we should never expect to beat Florida or Georgia? No, I am saying though, that when both programs are going strong, it's going to be tough to overtake them, we need to raise ourselves to status of a regular 8-9 win team first. Since the 1950's ended, that's been our baseline anyway, a Top 20 team, not a Top 10 team. We need to create stability like we did before and wait for our power vacuum, and then step into it again and fight like hell to hold onto it once we get it again. Firing coaches every 3-5 years, especially when we find one who regularly wins 9 games will turn us into Ole Miss, a once proud program whose glory days are long, long gone.