This.
I don't think officials are nearly skilled enough to make strategically specific bad calls. That would be like (and appear like) someone skilled with a hammer being asked to reprogram a computer.
What I suspect is going on with the officiating--and against the Vols, possibly--is something broad and general, comparable to umpires narrowing the called strike zone to increase hitting to enhance fan interest, or widening the strike zone in a game that's been promoted as a "pitcher's duel."
I think the lack of holding calls could be a general approach to enhance the passing game and offense, and to produce more close games that hold viewers.
Tennessee's new offense, and especially combined now with an improved defensive pass rush, threatens to create more blowouts that only Tennessee fans would be watching by the 4th quarter. That could be enough for the league office to let it be known that, for the good of the SEC('s coffers) "Tennessee's conference games neeto be closer."
I've also wondered what would happen to the entire NCAA football TV product if Heupel's offense became the trend and spread to a majority of college teams. It becomes a different game, in relation to time and continuity--which changes the advertising equation--which means you're messing with the goose that lays the golden eggs that get EVERYONE in the college football business paid.
I've wondered if Tennessee's success last season scared the powers-that-be, and they're trying to squelch the system's success this season while they research whether this new style of football is a threat, or if it can be used to increase revenues.
When you follow the money, also be reminded that RISK MANAGEMENT is job One for making and investing money. It's hard to say how many entities saw last season's Vols as a risk to be managed. But hammer-wielding referees could be used to "nudge" against certain aspects of it, while it's still being studied by accountants and TV programmers.
