Can Michigan, Tennessee and Washington bring the ‘90s back to college football all at once?

On New Year’s Day 2001, Michigan, Tennessee and Washington fans could have been forgiven for thinking that their futures were bright.

Michigan had just won a share of a Big Ten title, its third in four years, and was about to play in the Citrus Bowl. Tennessee had ended a rebuilding season on a six-game winning streak and was about to play in the Cotton Bowl. And Washington was in the Rose Bowl, feeling legitimately aggrieved that it had been left out of the BCS Championship at 10-1.

While Michigan was beating Auburn in the Citrus, John Cooper was coaching his last game at Ohio State, an embarrassing 17-point defeat to South Carolina in the Outback. Jim Tressel would soon replace him. Michigan’s record against the Buckeyes since? That’d be 2-13.

The Wolverines would win the Big Ten in 2003 and 2004 and have a few 10-win seasons, but they have not won a conference (or even a division) since then. Michigan finds itself unable to beat not only Ohio State, but also Michigan State. The Wolverines are 1-7 against the Spartans since Mike Hart’s “Little Brother” comment. (Michigan’s 10-3 2015 in Jim Harbaugh’s debut might seem to disqualify the Wolverines from this conversation, but U-M once again lost to both OSU and MSU.)

Tennessee won the SEC in 1997 and 1998, then played in the Fiesta Bowl in 1999. Tennessee’s 8-3 record in 2000 with a young roster appeared to be a brief blip before Phil Fulmer kept winning big.

In reality, the Vols haven’t played in a major bowl since, their seasons producing a collection of pre-Playoff Peach and Outback trips, at best. The Vols have no division titles since 2007. They haven’t beaten Alabama since 2006 or Florida since 2004.

And Washington ... poor, poor Washington. The Huskies haven’t been to Pasadena since their trip to end the 2000 season. Rick Neuheisel’s tenure went downhill, and then the program bottomed out under Ty Willingham before the era of “Seven-Win” Steve Sarkisian.

Not only has Washington not beaten Oregon since 2003, last year was the first time in that 12-game losing streak in which the Huskies came within one score.

In the 15 years leading up to our starting point of New Year’s Day 2001, Michigan, Tennessee and Washington were fourth, fifth and 11th nationally in winning percentage. Since, they’re 26th, 36th and 85th.

Michigan is sixth in early collective preseason rankings, Tennessee seventh and Washington tied for 10th. And those with skin in the game are also high on these three fallen powers. Michigan and Washington have the highest over/under wins projections in their leagues; Tennessee is a half a game from the top of the SEC.

These are almost exactly the spots that the three teams held the 15 years before 2000. Is this nostalgia on the part of writers (and the betting public) who came of age in that era and who see the return of the Wolverines, Vols and Huskies as the way the universe should be? Or is there a reason to believe that 15 years of mostly mediocrity and occasional misery is going to end for these three?

Michigan, Tennessee and Washington return 14, 17 and 15 starters, respectively. Additionally, all three were undervalued in 2015, in that they tended to win by large margins and then lose close games. In other words, they were better than their records.

Michigan finished 12th in the AP Poll and 8th in F/+; Tennessee was 22nd in the final AP poll and 18th in F/+; and Washington was unranked in the AP Poll (or ranked at any point in the season) and 13th in F/+. Finally, all three programs have well-credentialed coaches who are relatively new in their jobs and have shown signs of improvement.

You have owned your rival for years, and yet you are being rated at or below their levels.

Why should an Ohio State fan accept being told that Michigan is a co-favorite in the Big Ten after winning 42-13 last November in Ann Arbor?

So are the high expectations for Michigan, Tennessee and Washington legitimate?

All three programs have to recruit out of state in order to win conference titles. Are the last 15 years a reflection of those programs struggling to handle the burden of convincing blue-chip recruits to move hundreds of miles north?

Or did the three programs dip because of bad coaching hires? Now that they aren’t coached by Brady Hoke, Derek Dooley or Willingham, shouldn’t we expect them to return to their prior levels?

Either way, the optimism is warranted. If you think they suffered because of a lack of in-state talent, then the conclusion would be that they need top coaches to overcome that limitation. After all, all three won a lot before 2000. Their need to recruit out-of-state was as true when they were winning as it’s been when they’ve been losing. And if you think that they dipped because of bad coaching hires, then a top coach will solve that problem, as well.

Harbaugh turned Stanford from the worst program in the Pac-10 to one of the best and then went to three straight NFC Championship games. Butch Jones won in three-year stretches at Central Michigan and Cincinnati before improving Tennessee in each of his first three seasons in Knoxville. Chris Petersen went 92-and frickin’-12 at Boise State, beating Georgia, Virginia Tech, Oregon (twice), TCU and Oklahoma.

It’s never 100 percent safe to proclaim a coach a guaranteed winner, but these are as close as one could expect. Unless these coaches are about to produce results out of step with their track records, then Michigan’s, Tennessee’s, and Washington’s 15 years of relative misery are likely to end soon, and emphatically.