Pete Carroll's USC Trojans benefited from a controversial call that would have been reversed by instant replay.

It keeps happening.

From a non-call Saturday that cost Penn State a potential game-winning drive at Ohio State, to the wrong call two weeks ago that gave USC a touchdown it didn't deserve, college football officiating blunders keep piling up in the games that matter most.

As the season rolls on and the stakes grow higher, every crucial flag dropped or whistle not blown could mean $13 million in somebody else's pocket. Just look at the Trojans, who were the beneficiaries of a gift touchdown that beat California two weeks ago, keeping alive their BCS hopes and the big-money payout that comes with it.

That score could trigger a domino effect to the national championship game. Notre Dame, which plays USC in its regular-season finale, could get a bigger boost from a late-season victory over USC. Thanks to that controversial score and victory against Cal, USC has just two losses and is 11th in the BCS standings.

It was one call. One mistake. Perhaps worth $13 million. Or even more.

It's happening frequently enough that several head coaches are lobbying to bring instant replay to the college game. With so much on the line -- from job security to bonuses to the pressure of funding the athletic department budget -- most coaches are at least curious to see what effect advanced technology could have. And the sooner, the better.

"I was never a fan of instant replay -- never," Arizona coach John Mackovic said. "But there's so much more at stake today than there was 25, 30 years ago. One missed play, one blown call and that changes the outcome of a game. That can affect not only one team, but the entire conference."

Fuming on the sidelines
Such was the case Saturday in Columbus, Ohio. With 2:13 left and Penn State facing fourth-and-6, Big Ten officials failed to call pass interference after Ohio State cornerback Chris Gamble tugged receiver Bryant Johnson to the ground. The no-call gave the Buckeyes the ball, preserving a 13-7 victory, a 9-0 record and the top spot in the Big Ten standings.

It was the third time this season Penn State's players and coaches were miffed following a questionable call late in a loss.

"The problem is that you have a bunch of kids who are in there busting their butt to win a football game," head coach Joe Paterno said. "They are working like dogs. You owe it to them to make sure the game is won by the players."

Paterno, who at 75 years old is college football's elder statesman, chased down a game official and grabbed him by the shoulder after a pair of controversial calls cost the Nittany Lions in a 42-35 overtime loss to Iowa on Sept. 28.

	Joe Paterno hasn't been shy about voicing his displeasure over calls that he believes have robbed Penn State of victories.

Two weeks later, after an incomplete-pass ruling kept the Nittany Lions from attempting a game-winning field goal in a 27-24 overtime loss to Michigan, Paterno and Penn State athletics director Tim Curley called for a comprehensive review of Big Ten game officials.

That same week, the SEC reprimanded Mississippi State coach Jackie Sherrill for using his Oct. 9 news conference to show reporters a frame-by-frame rundown of several plays he thought were incorrectly called during the Bulldogs' 34-10 loss to South Carolina.

Prior to that, the Big Ten suspended four officials for failing to meet "Big Ten standards" during a Sept. 21 game between Purdue and Wake Forest.

And then there was USC's touchdown. Video replays showed that receiver Kareem Kelly trapped a pass and the score shouldn't have counted. Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen even admitted so later. Yet the touchdown stood, helping the Trojans erase an 18-point deficit and defeat Cal 30-28. And Monday, when the latest BCS standings were released, there were the Trojans, fresh off Saturday's 44-33 victory at Oregon, still alive at No. 11. Only the top 12 teams are eligible for a BCS game and the $13 million payday that comes with it.

Despite the criticism, conference commissioners, officiating coordinators and most head coaches agree that officiating remains at the high standard it has always been held to, and that these are only a few isolated incidents involving missed calls that cost teams a victory.

"Ever year, there are going to be instances where coaches are upset at a game because they lose," said the Pac-10's Hansen. "There are just days when bad things happen to the officials and sometimes because of the officials. But this year, our officiating has been at a good level and they've done a good job."

Others, such as Nebraska head coach Frank Solich, aren't so sure.

"When you watch the film or a game on television, there are always some things that come into question that very likely could have been overruled if instant replay were in play," Solich said. "Whether or not it's feasible, I don't know. But certainly, this is a year that would maybe raise some eyebrows.

Upon Further Review

Jackie Sherrill showed reporters portions of game film in which he thought officials had blown calls. John Soffey is the coordinator of officials for the Big East Conference. Each week he spends 60-70 hours critiquing each of the conference's 46 officials. The job starts on Saturday, with either Soffey or one of his five technical advisors attending each Big East game. After the game, the advisors meet with the officials in the locker room to watch the game film, where they point out positives and negatives of how the game was officiated. Then, a penalty report is filled out, in which every foul -- even those declined -- is noted. That report is faxed to Soffey. On Sunday, each official phones Soffey to discuss how they believe they did. Soffey then watches the game tapes from the television broadcast, if available, as well as each school's game film to rate the officials' performance. Every call or non-call is ranked on a zero-to-five scale, with a five for the correct call, judgment and officiating mechanics and a zero for a blown call. Typically scores range from 3.0 to 4.3. The scores are logged into a computer and compiled at the end of the season. In addition, both head coaches rate the officials after each game. They also send tapes to Soffey, pointing out blown calls. Three NFL officials also will critique one game each week and write their own advice for the officiating crew. Late in the week, Soffey records voiceovers for a videotape that will prepare each official for his next assignment. It includes comments on what was done right and wrong the week before and what tendencies among the players that the crew should be watchful for in the upcoming game. -- Wayne Drehs

In pursuit of near-perfection

Officials are the first to admit they're not perfect. Far from it. How else can you explain the job of John Soffey, the Big East's director of officiating who spends nearly 70 hours a week critiquing calls the 46 officials he oversees make -- and don't make. And even then, coaches send him tapes with plays that he and his staff overlook.

Perfection? It's impossible.

"You're going to go out there and make mistakes," said Soffey, who officiated for 30 years before taking his current job with the Big East in 1995. "You don't want to, you don't try to, but the game is just so fast."

It should be of no surprise then that perfection is far from the standard by which officials are graded. Soffey said an official's goal is to not make a call that would negatively effect a game. Verne Surgeon, the Pac-10's officiating coordinator, said he set goals of 90 percent accuracy on minor violations and 95 percent accuracy on major infractions.

But what of the other 5 to 10 percent of the calls? With so much at stake, is it worth being right only most of the time? Colorado went on to win a national championship because of a fifth down. Nebraska won a title when one reciever kicked a ball to another receiver. Such craziness in today's landscape drive coaches insane. Yet Soffey admits that without good fortune, even the best officials can be reduced to average status.

"You have to be lucky," he said. "The ball has to bounce correctly for you to have a great day. I've had the best officials in the world get rated poorly because of a bad bounce. If they want it done right, then we should have instant replay. It's too important."

A logistical nightmare
But things aren't quite that simple. The hurdles of bringing replay to the college game are endless. Just for starters, there's the cost. Big 12 commissioner Kevin Weinberg has investigated bringing instant replay to each of his league's 70 home games next season and estimated the cost at roughly $150,000.

Hansen, the Pac-10 commissioner, recently spoke with a retired Pac-10 official who now works as an instant replay official in the NFL. He was told the cost would be closer to $1 million per venue.

"I am very much in favor of anything, including replay, that would help us get more calls correct," Hansen said. "But when you mention ($1 million per stadium), that's an awful lot of money. If that's the case, it would prevent us from doing just about anything."

Cost is just the first hurdle. Another is logistics. For one, not every game is televised. How would there be replay if the game wasn't televised? For another, not every stadium is built the same. Placing cameras in the corners of one stadium would give an entirely different perspective than it would from the same location in another stadium.

Then there are the concerns over how widespread replay would be. Would it be across the board in Division I-A? Only in the conferences that could afford it, creating an even larger gap between the haves and have-nots of the college football world?

These are all legitimate problems that would need to be ironed out before anything was put into place.

"Sure, (instant replay) would be tremendously beneficial," said Oregon State head coach Dennis Erickson, "but the logistics are a nightmare.

"If you're going to have it in the Pac-10, you need it in every conference. Then there's the issue of who's going to be the guy in the booth, who's going to assume the costs?," Erickson said. "To me, I think it would be good for the game, but impossible to make work."

Hansen isn't so sure. In his eyes, if the costs can be managed, anything is better than nothing.

"Why not get a better job at 50 percent of the games rather than zero?" he said. "I wonder if the stadium screens, which now most of our stadiums have, if we could use that. People tell me that the NFL usually has 10 to 12 cameras, and if you had one or two cameras it wouldn't be helpful. But again, if you have a chance at getting the right look at a play, it's better than nothing."

'Football can do without it'
There are other concerns. Like how instant replay would extend the length of games. Last year, Weinberg said the average Big 12 game went from 2 hours, 45 minutes to 3 hours, 10 minutes.

	There could come a day when game officials will be asked to take a peek to critique calls they make in college football.

And not everybody is convinced this is a good idea.

Consider Paterno: "When I watch a pro game and I see the official stick his head in whatever they call that thing, I say to myself, 'The games are long enough.' And sometimes I am not so sure they can even make a decision when they look at the replay."

USC coach Pete Carroll, who had instant replay at his disposal during a stint as head coach of the NFL's New England Patriots, knows instant replay is not a panacea for missed calls.

"It's a great system, it fits in the NFL, but college football can do without it," Carroll said. "Over the long haul, they can correct some calls, but you get frustrated at the ones they can't correct."

Yet concerns about officiating are strong enough and the stakes have become high enough that at least three major football conferences -- the Big Ten, Big 12 and Pac-10 -- will look into implementing instant replay in the offseason. SEC representatives said this week that, for now, their conference isn't interested.

But others are. And for now, that's about all most concerned coaches can ask for.

"As important as these games are now and everything that comes along with it, you want to have the opportunity to play it under the fairest conditions," Colorado head coach Gary Barnett said. "That's all we're asking for. I'm just not sure if it will work."

Wayne Drehs is a staff writer at ESPN.com. He can be reached at wayne.drehs@espn3.com.