UT History

[a vol n tears]

Many fans on here talk about getting back to playing TENN football again. I understand there are all ages of fans on here,so I decided to look up the winning % of each decade from the 60s - 2009.
Decade of the 60s = 63%. Decade of the 70s = 61%. 80s = 65%. 90s = 83%. 2000s = 67%
I didn’t go back farther because football has changed so much. I know UT won a NC in 51, but Minnesota won 4 NCs earlier in the century and other schools won that haven’t been relevant since.
I hope the Vols win every game but based on every decade but the 90s they haven’t been relevant. I’m sure we all want the 90s winning again but is there a possibility that instead of the 90 s being a normal, could they actually be an outleyer and Tenn is not a powerhouse school but just a Minn of present times. I know I’m gonna get roasted for this but it’s just food for talk.

 

[RockyTop140]

We only had one national championship in the 90's. You're just leaving out the the 5 others we have. Tennessee is a top 15 program all time.

 

[a vol n tears]

We only had one national championship in the 90's. You're just leaving out the the 5 others we have. Tennessee is a top 15 program all time.

I agree but 4 of those are in the 40s and 50s, the other in the 60s with a 9-2 record. This was why I used Minn as an example of having 4 NCs but nothing in modern football times. Army, Yale, Harvard, etc have championships to claim but you don’t say they are a top program.

 

[beneVOLence]

I don't expect the 90's winning, but do expect a respectful coached team that occasionally wins or competes for an SEC championship. If you do that, you will be in the conversation for the College Football Playoffs.

 

[UTK]

You should expect 90s success or actually even greater. Simply because UT has it all to be a top 10 program every year. Besides mangament and coaches. Hopefully that’s fixed now.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I agree but 4 of those are in the 40s and 50s, the other in the 60s with a 9-2 record. This was why I used Minn as an example of having 4 NCs but nothing in modern football times. Army, Yale, Harvard, etc have championships to claim but you don’t say they are a top program.

Would you consider Michigan and Georgia a top program?

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

I agree but 4 of those are in the 40s and 50s, the other in the 60s with a 9-2 record. This was why I used Minn as an example of having 4 NCs but nothing in modern football times. Army, Yale, Harvard, etc have championships to claim but you don’t say they are a top program.

Yale and Harvard don't give athletic scholarships anymore. As for army, they dominated during the war years. Pretty much when all of the young men who normally would have been playing at the power schools of the day, were off fighting the war.

Minnesota is probably the better comparison. They were a major player in the mid 20th century, but for some reason fell into mediocrity. LSU and Oklahoma both went through an extended down period in the 90s, but they both finally made the right hire and bounced back. We will too

 

[Hacksaw]

We only had one national championship in the 90's. You're just leaving out the the 5 others we have. Tennessee is a top 15 program all time.

Until recent years, a Top 10 all-time program. Some of us seem to be suffering from BFS (Battered Fan Syndrome).

 

[MyBloodRunnethOrange]

Many fans on here talk about getting back to playing TENN football again. I understand there are all ages of fans on here,so I decided to look up the winning % of each decade from the 60s - 2009.
Decade of the 60s = 63%. Decade of the 70s = 61%. 80s = 65%. 90s = 83%. 2000s = 67%
I didn’t go back farther because football has changed so much. I know UT won a NC in 51, but Minnesota won 4 NCs earlier in the century and other schools won that haven’t been relevant since.
I hope the Vols win every game but based on every decade but the 90s they haven’t been relevant. I’m sure we all want the 90s winning again but is there a possibility that instead of the 90 s being a normal, could they actually be an outleyer and Tenn is not a powerhouse school but just a Minn of present times. I know I’m gonna get roasted for this but it’s just food for talk.

Let's look specifically at the 60s and 70s. Following the 56 SEC championship season, the program began to decline because Bowden Wyatt refused to scrap the outdated single wing. Recruiting suffered because of it. For a similar modern example look at Georgia Tech. They might win a few games because of their offense, but they can't recruit the caliber of athletes they need to compete week in and week out in a P5 conference. Back to Tennessee, after General Neyland died in 62, they let Wyatt go and Jim McDonald was the interim for a year before Doug Dickey took over in 64. From that point on Dickey had the team on an upward trajectory, winning the SEC in 67 and 69.

Just when Dickey had the program on a level ready to compete with Alabama, he bolted for his Alma mater. We made a disastrous hire in Bill Battle. He did alright for a few years with Dickey's players, but steadily ran the program into the ground. But the time Coach Majors took over in 77 it was at rock bottom. It took him until 83 to get back to winning like Tennessee fans were accustomed to.

Without the disastrous hire of Battle, we probably sustain the success of the late 60s throughout the 70s and 80s. So one hire truly can change an entire program for decades.

 

[LivinginthePast]

Why would you not consider the best coach in TN history. Dam u it matters it matters man.

 

[macrovol]

Statistics. 100% of the people who drink water at some point in their life eventually die.

 

[Behr]

Statistics. 100% of the people who drink water at some point in their life eventually die.

9 out of 10 men like big boobs. The 1 that doesn't, likes the other 9 men.

 

[Boca Vol]

OP, don't forget the addition of the 12th game against a scrub or D. 2 team skewing the numbers for most of the 2000's. Take out those wins and it looks even worse.

Bottom line, there's no amount of turd polish that can make the last decade + of UT football look good. Our last SEC E. winning team got its butt handed to them by UF and Bama...the same Bama team that lost to UL Monroe.

 

[Ashevillevol]

Why would you not consider the best coach in TN history. Dam u it matters it matters man.

Your name says it all.

 

[Behr]

OP, don't forget the addition of the 12th game against a scrub or D. 2 team skewing the numbers for most of the 2000's. Take out those wins and it looks even worse.

Bottom line, there's no amount of turd polish that can make the last decade + of UT football look good. Our last SEC E. winning team got its butt handed to them by UF and Bama...the same Bama team that lost to UL Monroe.

Thanks brother, that almost got overlooked.

 

[Firebirdparts]

If we learn anything from that, learn that the GOAT programs operate at the 80% range and have excursions to 90% and if you can do that, you can start challenging for the playoffs. A lot of people on VN used to post that 80% is mediocre football, when in fact it is elite football if you sustain it.

 

[Rudy123]

I

Many fans on here talk about getting back to playing TENN football again. I understand there are all ages of fans on here,so I decided to look up the winning % of each decade from the 60s - 2009.
Decade of the 60s = 63%. Decade of the 70s = 61%. 80s = 65%. 90s = 83%. 2000s = 67%
I didn’t go back farther because football has changed so much. I know UT won a NC in 51, but Minnesota won 4 NCs earlier in the century and other schools won that haven’t been relevant since.
I hope the Vols win every game but based on every decade but the 90s they haven’t been relevant. I’m sure we all want the 90s winning again but is there a possibility that instead of the 90 s being a normal, could they actually be an outleyer and Tenn is not a powerhouse school but just a Minn of present times. I know I’m gonna get roasted for this but it’s just food for talk.

I don't see that! A couple of year's ago, I look at every top 10 list that is possible in college football.
We were top 10,in: players drafted in NFL, all time winning %. Game attendance, bowl game appearances, bowl wins, and stadium experience
No we have never had a Heisman trophy winner and we have not won the SEC since 1998 but there are other programs who would kill to have what we have accomplished overall
So NO, I don't believe that we are less than an excellent program
Yes, we have slipped but I think we will do like Majors did when he returned and we will get better each year until in a few years, we will be excellent
Look at the program when Majors returned and look at it a few seasons later when they upset Miami in Sugar Bowl or when they beat Bo in Auburn. Didn't happen over night but did happen by making baby steps

 

[Boca Vol]

Thanks brother, that almost got overlooked.

I only added that for you!

 

[VOLINVONORE]

I agree but 4 of those are in the 40s and 50s, the other in the 60s with a 9-2 record. This was why I used Minn as an example of having 4 NCs but nothing in modern football times. Army, Yale, Harvard, etc have championships to claim but you don’t say they are a top program.

Minn won the last of those with a former Tennessee player, Murray Marmath as their head coach.

 

[a vol n tears]

OK, I see I’ve ruffled a few feathers just as I thought. I think TENN will return to winning, but I have thought that for the past 10 years. In the SEC it gets tougher to rebuild all the time. This is the mega of college football. A poster above mentioned all time wins, championships, NFL players in TNs history. If you played in the 1800s and early 1900s you can expect big numbers. Based on the past 68 years, the VOLS have had 1 decade with a winning percentage above 65%. Let that soak in........Having a big budget, great facilities, best fans, and great stadium does not change the facts of the past many years. I myself was surprised by this. Maybe as fans we should be happy with big wins, upsets, and enjoy the games instead of worrying about championships. Mississippi seems to enjoy it.

 

[Johnnyreb#VFL]

If we could have had just 1 more win in 2015 and 1 more in 2016, you’re looking at back to back 10 win seasons with a sugar bowl appearance, SEC East Title, dang you LSU, (possibly 11 wins in 2016) but I digress. Point is, hasn’t been that long since we’ve had success and been on the verge of something special here. People act like Butch went 0-60 here lol but I get why

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Something's off with your data. I just did a single data point check (the 60s), and it came out wrong.

1960-1969: 105 games, 67 wins, 32 losses, and 6 ties == 67% win rate. You listed it at 63%.

I don't know if all your other points are off, as well. You may want to double-check.

 

[jarnol32]

OK, I see I’ve ruffled a few feathers just as I thought. I think TENN will return to winning, but I have thought that for the past 10 years. In the SEC it gets tougher to rebuild all the time. This is the mega of college football. A poster above mentioned all time wins, championships, NFL players in TNs history. If you played in the 1800s and early 1900s you can expect big numbers. Based on the past 68 years, the VOLS have had 1 decade with a winning percentage above 65%. Let that soak in........Having a big budget, great facilities, best fans, and great stadium does not change the facts of the past many years. I myself was surprised by this. Maybe as fans we should be happy with big wins, upsets, and enjoy the games instead of worrying about championships. Mississippi seems to enjoy it.

Don’t compare Tennessee to Ole Miss. That is pure blasphemy.

 

[a vol n tears]

Something's off with your data. I just did a single data point check (the 60s), and it came out wrong.

1960-1969: 105 games, 67 wins, 32 losses, and 6 ties == 67% win rate. You listed it at 63%.

I don't know if all your other points are off, as well. You may want to double-check.

You may be correct for the decades with ties. I didn't count them as wins but did count them in total number of games played.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

You may be correct for the decades with ties. I didn't count them as wins but did count them in total number of games played.

Hmm, that appears not to be the only error, then.

Leaving out the ties, the 1960s still come out at 64% instead of the 63% you list. Small difference, but proves there is a second source of inaccuracy.

Did you perhaps round 63.8% down to 63% instead of up to 64%? That could be the second source of error. Or maybe it's something else.


p.s. For most folks, a tie == 0.5 "win" (and 0.5 "loss") when calculating win percentages. You probably knew that, just didn't bother to do it.

Extreme example of why it's important to include the ties: imaginary team plays a 12-game season, wins 1, ties 11. Without the ties, his win rate is 100% (or 8%, if you go 1 of 12). With it, his win rate is 54%. We all agree that 54% is a more accurate summation of the season than 100% or 8%.