I can't find it now, but earlier I was reading the NCAA rule, and doesn't have to be helmet to helmet, they call it spearing in the rules. It's illegal to hit someone with the crown of your helmet (facemask too) in their, chest, back etc. The rule is there to keep fractures of the spine occuring on the tackler, not necessarily the person being hit. The intent part of the rule was amended as follows"
Rule 2-24-1 Spearing. Delete “intentional” from this rule. (Also, see change to Rule 9-1-2-l and n.) Rationale: After reviewing survey data from the AFCA and officiating organizations, it appears officials are hesitant to call this foul in some cases because intent is difficult to determine. The Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sport also recommended this alteration.
<< <i>There must be intent to injure or harm, unless it's the QB and then apparently you cannot do it at all anywhere on the field >>
Could you provide us with a link or cut/paste job of where you obtained this info?
No offense DM, but it sure sounds like sour grapes. A shot like that will be called everytime, no matter what team/player. >>
No offense taken. I didn't read it on the net, but watched it sometime during the week after the game on FSN. Not sure what show it was on as I have my TV running all day while I'm on the computer, but had it in my mind it was on the "Best Damn Sports Show". I believe the guy said he is either currently an official or used to be and works with the NCAA Rules Committee. He talked about how helmet to helmet happens on every play, especially along the line. He said that it has been up to the officials to determine what's a penalty and that most often is enforced if an official feels there's intent or not. Players often hit helmets on run plays, lineman get their face masks locked together, a player is sliding or falling down as a player comes in for a hit. He mentioned numerous scenarios where helmet to helmet happens and isn't enforced. The spearing, or use of the crown of the helmet, is more often enforced but he said there are instances where it may be overlooked. He explained how players extending themselves while falling or diving at players can often lead to helmet to helmet and it's up to them to decide if the player is in control or not.
<< <i>I can't believe you're still complaining about the UM/OSU game...let it go man...just let it go. >>
I believe I have the right to discuss my views about this here, so I will continue to do so as often as I like. I can't believe how far you have your head up arse. Or shall I say Booty?
it was "illegal" back when I played football in the Mid 80's in Jr. and Sr. High and as IM's thread stated.....it was called Spearing at that time for us. I believe for us it was an immediate ejection.
<< <i> I believe I have the right to discuss my views about this here, so I will continue to do so as often as I like. I can't believe how far you have your head up arse. Or shall I say Booty? >>
/yawn
No one was disputing your 'right' to discuss anything, but the more you whine and cry about it, the more ridiculous you sound.
Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well.
Guess the popular vote dictates who plays in the championship.
Such a shame.......
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>it was "illegal" back when I played football in the Mid 80's in Jr. and Sr. High and as IM's thread stated.....it was called Spearing at that time for us. I believe for us it was an immediate ejection. >>
Spearing is actually a rule that's been in place for some time. It used to be legal if it was an accident, but you could be penalized or ejected if intent was determined. They changed the terminology to eliminate "intent" this year. The NCAA's objective was to eliminate the so-called "unintentional" helmet to helmet contact that players were getting away with in the pocket, including (and mainly focused on) hits under the chin/facemask. Again, it still happens though and refs such as the one in the interview said that many still use their discretion when they are deciding to throw the flag. In a sport where two players are running directly towards each other, you're bound to bounce heads. Again, it happens frequently in a game and this guy actually said it does happen on every play. It may not be each and every play, but I suspect the vast majority have some form or said contact. Hell, lineman generally line up with their helmets inches away from each other and their helmets connect before any other parts of them do. Linebackers hitting backs in the hole are frequently helmet to helmet collisions. It happens all of the time. Pay attention during any game and you will see it. Some may not be vicious and loud, but contact is contact by the NCAA's standards and punishable.
<< <i>No one was disputing your 'right' to discuss anything, but the more you whine and cry about it, the more ridiculous you sound.
Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well.
OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game. >>
Merely discussing, not whining or crying. Vastly superior? LOL. You're right. So if thats the case, shouldn't the vastly superior (to USC)Oregon St be matched up against Ohio St in the championship game? I don't care to speculate the outcome of a particular game such as U-M /USC, I just see that Michigan deserves to be there more but USC will probably get an opportunity to play because people don't like to see the two best teams play again so soon.
Is your intent always to bait people? I would say you probably feel you're a master baiter, but I simply think you're a jerk off. Hope that helps
<< <i> Merely discussing, not whining or crying. Vastly superior? LOL. You're right. So if thats the case, shouldn't the vastly superior (to USC)Oregon St be matched up against Ohio St in the championship game? I don't care to speculate the outcome of a particular game such as U-M /USC, I just see that Michigan deserves to be there more but USC will probably get an opportunity to play because people don't like to see the two best teams play again so soon.
Is your intent always to bait people? I would say you probably feel you're a master baiter, but I simply think you're a jerk off. Hope that helps >>
Truth hurts huh?
I guess that's why you resort to the 'jerk off' comment. Master baiter huh? Wow you're friggen original.
Look, if UM deserved to be in the title game, THEY WOULD HAVE BEATEN OSU. Simple. Sorry you are unable to fathom as simple a concept as that.
You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? If they would have BEATEN OSU, then I would agree. However, based on their inept performance, they aren't going. Your opinion runs counter to the people that really matters: the voters.
Now, go cry on the UM boards. Your incessant complaining (whining about a call from a game? BOO FREAKIN' HOO!) is reminiscent of the guy who complains most about calls - joey stalin. I guess you're aspiring to follow in his footsteps.
I guess that's why you resort to the 'jerk off' comment. Master baiter huh? Wow you're friggen original.
Look, if UM deserved to be in the title game, THEY WOULD HAVE BEATEN OSU. Simple. Sorry you are unable to fathom as simple a concept as that.
You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? If they would have BEATEN OSU, then I would agree. However, based on their inept performance, they aren't going. Your opinion runs counter to the people that really matters: the voters.
Now, go cry on the UM boards. Your incessant complaining (whining about a call from a game? BOO FREAKIN' HOO!) is reminiscent of the guy who complains most about calls - joey stalin. I guess you're aspiring to follow in his footsteps.
High aspirations you got there, son! >>
Truth? I'm fairly certain you wouldn't know a truth if it came up and slapped you in the face.
As far as "resorting" to particular comments, I merely said them in jest, thus the smiley face. You continually try to bait people into petty little arguments you seem to enjoy having, but I'm not going to bite and said those comments to indicate that I see what you're trying to do. You obviously are unworthy of debate/discussion without trying to be crass, obnoxious and argumentative. Why should I waste my time responding to someone who only see's his own opinion as fact? You're obviously not here to discuss and debate, but simply to argue and I have no interest in spending my free time doing that.
IrishMike - Is ND really the Fighting Irish? I saw a couple of games of theirs this year where they were the "Roll Over & Play Dead" Irish. Guess that was too much to fit on a helmet
Well one thing is for sure... USC will not be playing for the championship.
For those USC fans who showed respect towards other teams.. You had a great run. Being in the championship game 3 years in a row is an accomplishment and something to be proud of. I wish you the best of luck next year.
To the others that rejoiced when another team lost... Well.. Karma is a pain in the neck, huh
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
Just for the sake of argument, did anybody miss the obvious helmet to helmet contact by USC on UCLA's QB as he was running towards the sidelines? It definitely mirrored the play in the Michigan game with 2 exceptions. It was much more brutal and there wasn't a flag. Again, usually the refs are reluctant to throw the flag with a QB scrambling out of the pocket. Or did you just think that the refs didn't see (or were deaf and didn't hear) the helmets smackin' together.
Good defensive game though. UCLA seems quite fast on defense. I guess the better team won.
And to regress to my youth and immaturity, I must quote my favorite USC fan a couple of times -
1)
<< <i>USC has dominated against very good teams, and took the #6 team in the land to the woodshed. They are a very deserving #2 and, avoiding a complete meltdown against UCLA, will take their rightful place against OSU for the national title. >>
Was that a meltdown?
2)
<< <i>USC is going to give OSU everything they can handle and then some. >>
Are they playing them next year?
3)
<< <i>How often do teams lose their last game of the year and then get a spot in the national title game? >>
Make that one more that wont
4)
<< <i>They knew what was on the line, they knew if they lost they'd be out of the hunt, especially if USC beat ND. >>
I suspect those voters will still push Florida over Michigan and although I disagree with that move, they're still a better team than SC. And that means Michigan could whoop SC in the Rose so that's still funny!
5)
<< <i>Who's to say USC *isn't* the second best team in the nation? >>
I'm guessing we can all agree on that.
6)
<< <i>helmet to helmet contact is called anytime on anyone, college or pro. >>
Well apparently not "anytime", as that one tonight was a nasty one.
7)
<< <i>Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well. >>
I believe we may be able to find out for sure.
8)
<< <i>OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game. >>
I looked and still didn't find anything about this game coming up.
9)
<< <i>You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? >>
I'm sticking with my original vote. Yes.
Good night all. Very good game. Hope the Rose can be as entertaining. Go Blue
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>Just for the sake of argument, did anybody miss the obvious helmet to helmet contact by USC on UCLA's QB as he was running towards the sidelines? It definitely mirrored the play in the Michigan game with 2 exceptions. It was much more brutal and there wasn't a flag. Again, usually the refs are reluctant to throw the flag with a QB scrambling out of the pocket. Or did you just think that the refs didn't see (or were deaf and didn't hear) the helmets smackin' together.
Good defensive game though. UCLA seems quite fast on defense. I guess the better team won.
And to regress to my youth and immaturity, I must quote my favorite USC fan a couple of times -
1)
<< <i>USC has dominated against very good teams, and took the #6 team in the land to the woodshed. They are a very deserving #2 and, avoiding a complete meltdown against UCLA, will take their rightful place against OSU for the national title. >>
Was that a meltdown?
2)
<< <i>USC is going to give OSU everything they can handle and then some. >>
Are they playing them next year?
3)
<< <i>How often do teams lose their last game of the year and then get a spot in the national title game? >>
Make that one more that wont
4)
<< <i>They knew what was on the line, they knew if they lost they'd be out of the hunt, especially if USC beat ND. >>
I suspect those voters will still push Florida over Michigan and although I disagree with that move, they're still a better team than SC. And that means Michigan could whoop SC in the Rose so that's still funny!
5)
<< <i>Who's to say USC *isn't* the second best team in the nation? >>
I'm guessing we can all agree on that.
6)
<< <i>helmet to helmet contact is called anytime on anyone, college or pro. >>
Well apparently not "anytime", as that one tonight was a nasty one.
7)
<< <i>Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well. >>
I believe we may be able to find out for sure.
8)
<< <i>OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game. >>
I looked and still didn't find anything about this game coming up.
9)
<< <i>You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? >>
I'm sticking with my original vote. Yes.
Good night all. Very good game. Hope the Rose can be as entertaining. Go Blue >>
I was thinking along the same lines with the helmet to helmet question. The difference, I think, is that in OSU vs Michigan the hit was up high (the Michigan player led with his helmet) and in UCLA vs USC the player was a bit lower & led with his arms. The helmet to helmet occured as a result of the QB's body dipping because of the intial blow from two defenders...............
<< <i>I was thinking along the same lines with the helmet to helmet question. The difference, I think, is that in OSU vs Michigan the hit was up high (the Michigan player led with his helmet) and in UCLA vs USC the player was a bit lower & led with his arms. The helmet to helmet occured as a result of the QB's body dipping because of the intial blow from two defenders............... >>
Not that it really matters because luckily it wasn't a deciding factor when it was all said and done, but I beg to differ. I TIVO'ed the game because I wasn't sure if I was going to be home to watch it. I've replayed the hit in SlowMo and the USC player, without a doubt, led with the top of his helmet and hit Cowen directly in the side of the helmet. He definitlely had his arms down and the hit was no lower than that in the Michigan game. Further, the other USC player in the play got to Cowen a fraction of a second before the other and had no bearing at all IMO on Cowens body position before the hit. Before that player even touched Cowen, the USC defenders' head was already completely down and approximately a foot from the helmet of Cowen. This hit, in my opinion, was WAY more vicious and dangerous than the hit in the Michigan/OSU game. All of the ref's couldn't have missed this hit.
With that being said, I still don't think this hit was any different than the one that happended in the Michigan game. I don't see where it was really necessary to blow the whistle in either case. The QB was out of the pocket and trying to get extra yards. In both situations, if the QB didn't want to get hit they should have went out of bounds a yard further back instead of trying to stretch it. I believe that as the ref said on the show that I watched, they wont usually call a hit like this with a QB scrambling out of the pocket.
Comments
helmet to helmet contact is called anytime on anyone, college or pro.
I can't believe you're still complaining about the UM/OSU game...let it go man...just let it go.
Rule 2-24-1
Spearing. Delete “intentional” from this rule. (Also, see change to Rule 9-1-2-l and n.) Rationale: After reviewing survey data from the AFCA and officiating organizations, it appears officials are hesitant to call this foul in some cases because intent is difficult to determine. The Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sport also recommended this alteration.
<< <i>
<< <i>There must be intent to injure or harm, unless it's the QB and then apparently you cannot do it at all anywhere on the field >>
Could you provide us with a link or cut/paste job of where you obtained this info?
No offense DM, but it sure sounds like sour grapes. A shot like that will be called everytime, no matter what team/player. >>
No offense taken. I didn't read it on the net, but watched it sometime during the week after the game on FSN. Not sure what show it was on as I have my TV running all day while I'm on the computer, but had it in my mind it was on the "Best Damn Sports Show". I believe the guy said he is either currently an official or used to be and works with the NCAA Rules Committee. He talked about how helmet to helmet happens on every play, especially along the line. He said that it has been up to the officials to determine what's a penalty and that most often is enforced if an official feels there's intent or not. Players often hit helmets on run plays, lineman get their face masks locked together, a player is sliding or falling down as a player comes in for a hit. He mentioned numerous scenarios where helmet to helmet happens and isn't enforced. The spearing, or use of the crown of the helmet, is more often enforced but he said there are instances where it may be overlooked. He explained how players extending themselves while falling or diving at players can often lead to helmet to helmet and it's up to them to decide if the player is in control or not.
<< <i>I can't believe you're still complaining about the UM/OSU game...let it go man...just let it go. >>
I believe I have the right to discuss my views about this here, so I will continue to do so as often as I like. I can't believe how far you have your head up arse. Or shall I say Booty?
<< <i>
I believe I have the right to discuss my views about this here, so I will continue to do so as often as I like. I can't believe how far you have your head up arse. Or shall I say Booty? >>
/yawn
No one was disputing your 'right' to discuss anything, but the more you whine and cry about it, the more ridiculous you sound.
Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well.
OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game.
<< <i>Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well. >>
<< <i>OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game. >>
I think OSU and USC will be a great game... I don't USC would dominate UofM and UofM, if they play well, could still be #2 at the end of the season.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Such a shame.......
<< <i>it was "illegal" back when I played football in the Mid 80's in Jr. and Sr. High and as IM's thread stated.....it was called Spearing at that time for us. I believe for us it was an immediate ejection. >>
Spearing is actually a rule that's been in place for some time. It used to be legal if it was an accident, but you could be penalized or ejected if intent was determined. They changed the terminology to eliminate "intent" this year. The NCAA's objective was to eliminate the so-called "unintentional" helmet to helmet contact that players were getting away with in the pocket, including (and mainly focused on) hits under the chin/facemask. Again, it still happens though and refs such as the one in the interview said that many still use their discretion when they are deciding to throw the flag. In a sport where two players are running directly towards each other, you're bound to bounce heads. Again, it happens frequently in a game and this guy actually said it does happen on every play. It may not be each and every play, but I suspect the vast majority have some form or said contact. Hell, lineman generally line up with their helmets inches away from each other and their helmets connect before any other parts of them do. Linebackers hitting backs in the hole are frequently helmet to helmet collisions. It happens all of the time. Pay attention during any game and you will see it. Some may not be vicious and loud, but contact is contact by the NCAA's standards and punishable.
<< <i>No one was disputing your 'right' to discuss anything, but the more you whine and cry about it, the more ridiculous you sound.
Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well.
OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game. >>
Merely discussing, not whining or crying. Vastly superior? LOL. You're right. So if thats the case, shouldn't the vastly superior (to USC)Oregon St be matched up against Ohio St in the championship game? I don't care to speculate the outcome of a particular game such as U-M /USC, I just see that Michigan deserves to be there more but USC will probably get an opportunity to play because people don't like to see the two best teams play again so soon.
Is your intent always to bait people? I would say you probably feel you're a master baiter, but I simply think you're a jerk off. Hope that helps
<< <i>
Merely discussing, not whining or crying. Vastly superior? LOL. You're right. So if thats the case, shouldn't the vastly superior (to USC)Oregon St be matched up against Ohio St in the championship game? I don't care to speculate the outcome of a particular game such as U-M /USC, I just see that Michigan deserves to be there more but USC will probably get an opportunity to play because people don't like to see the two best teams play again so soon.
Is your intent always to bait people? I would say you probably feel you're a master baiter, but I simply think you're a jerk off. Hope that helps
Truth hurts huh?
I guess that's why you resort to the 'jerk off' comment. Master baiter huh? Wow you're friggen original.
Look, if UM deserved to be in the title game, THEY WOULD HAVE BEATEN OSU. Simple. Sorry you are unable to fathom as simple a concept as that.
You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? If they would have BEATEN OSU, then I would agree. However, based on their inept performance, they aren't going. Your opinion runs counter to the people that really matters: the voters.
Now, go cry on the UM boards. Your incessant complaining (whining about a call from a game? BOO FREAKIN' HOO!) is reminiscent of the guy who complains most about calls - joey stalin. I guess you're aspiring to follow in his footsteps.
High aspirations you got there, son!
<< <i>Truth hurts huh?
I guess that's why you resort to the 'jerk off' comment. Master baiter huh? Wow you're friggen original.
Look, if UM deserved to be in the title game, THEY WOULD HAVE BEATEN OSU. Simple. Sorry you are unable to fathom as simple a concept as that.
You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? If they would have BEATEN OSU, then I would agree. However, based on their inept performance, they aren't going. Your opinion runs counter to the people that really matters: the voters.
Now, go cry on the UM boards. Your incessant complaining (whining about a call from a game? BOO FREAKIN' HOO!) is reminiscent of the guy who complains most about calls - joey stalin. I guess you're aspiring to follow in his footsteps.
High aspirations you got there, son! >>
Truth? I'm fairly certain you wouldn't know a truth if it came up and slapped you in the face.
As far as "resorting" to particular comments, I merely said them in jest, thus the smiley face. You continually try to bait people into petty little arguments you seem to enjoy having, but I'm not going to bite and said those comments to indicate that I see what you're trying to do. You obviously are unworthy of debate/discussion without trying to be crass, obnoxious and argumentative. Why should I waste my time responding to someone who only see's his own opinion as fact? You're obviously not here to discuss and debate, but simply to argue and I have no interest in spending my free time doing that.
IrishMike - Is ND really the Fighting Irish? I saw a couple of games of theirs this year where they were the "Roll Over & Play Dead" Irish. Guess that was too much to fit on a helmet
For those USC fans who showed respect towards other teams.. You had a great run. Being in the championship game 3 years in a row is an accomplishment and something to be proud of. I wish you the best of luck next year.
To the others that rejoiced when another team lost... Well.. Karma is a pain in the neck, huh
<< <i>
Sort of like "ND" standing for "Not Deserving" (of the BCS)?
Good defensive game though. UCLA seems quite fast on defense. I guess the better team won.
And to regress to my youth and immaturity, I must quote my favorite USC fan a couple of times -
1)
<< <i>USC has dominated against very good teams, and took the #6 team in the land to the woodshed. They are a very deserving #2 and, avoiding a complete meltdown against UCLA, will take their rightful place against OSU for the national title. >>
Was that a meltdown?
2)
<< <i>USC is going to give OSU everything they can handle and then some. >>
Are they playing them next year?
3)
<< <i>How often do teams lose their last game of the year and then get a spot in the national title game? >>
Make that one more that wont
4)
<< <i>They knew what was on the line, they knew if they lost they'd be out of the hunt, especially if USC beat ND. >>
I suspect those voters will still push Florida over Michigan and although I disagree with that move, they're still a better team than SC. And that means Michigan could whoop SC in the Rose so that's still funny!
5)
<< <i>Who's to say USC *isn't* the second best team in the nation? >>
I'm guessing we can all agree on that.
6)
<< <i>helmet to helmet contact is called anytime on anyone, college or pro. >>
Well apparently not "anytime", as that one tonight was a nasty one.
7)
<< <i>Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well. >>
I believe we may be able to find out for sure.
8)
<< <i>OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game. >>
I looked and still didn't find anything about this game coming up.
9)
<< <i>You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? >>
I'm sticking with my original vote. Yes.
Good night all. Very good game. Hope the Rose can be as entertaining. Go Blue
<< <i>Just for the sake of argument, did anybody miss the obvious helmet to helmet contact by USC on UCLA's QB as he was running towards the sidelines? It definitely mirrored the play in the Michigan game with 2 exceptions. It was much more brutal and there wasn't a flag. Again, usually the refs are reluctant to throw the flag with a QB scrambling out of the pocket. Or did you just think that the refs didn't see (or were deaf and didn't hear) the helmets smackin' together.
Good defensive game though. UCLA seems quite fast on defense. I guess the better team won.
And to regress to my youth and immaturity, I must quote my favorite USC fan a couple of times -
1)
<< <i>USC has dominated against very good teams, and took the #6 team in the land to the woodshed. They are a very deserving #2 and, avoiding a complete meltdown against UCLA, will take their rightful place against OSU for the national title. >>
Was that a meltdown?
2)
<< <i>USC is going to give OSU everything they can handle and then some. >>
Are they playing them next year?
3)
<< <i>How often do teams lose their last game of the year and then get a spot in the national title game? >>
Make that one more that wont
4)
<< <i>They knew what was on the line, they knew if they lost they'd be out of the hunt, especially if USC beat ND. >>
I suspect those voters will still push Florida over Michigan and although I disagree with that move, they're still a better team than SC. And that means Michigan could whoop SC in the Rose so that's still funny!
5)
<< <i>Who's to say USC *isn't* the second best team in the nation? >>
I'm guessing we can all agree on that.
6)
<< <i>helmet to helmet contact is called anytime on anyone, college or pro. >>
Well apparently not "anytime", as that one tonight was a nasty one.
7)
<< <i>Look, OSU was the vastly superior team, and USC would dominate UM as well. >>
I believe we may be able to find out for sure.
8)
<< <i>OSU/USC will be an immensely entertaining game. >>
I looked and still didn't find anything about this game coming up.
9)
<< <i>You think UM deserves to be there more than USC? >>
I'm sticking with my original vote. Yes.
Good night all. Very good game. Hope the Rose can be as entertaining. Go Blue
I was thinking along the same lines with the helmet to helmet question. The difference, I think, is that in OSU vs Michigan the hit was up high (the Michigan player led with his helmet) and in UCLA vs USC the player was a bit lower & led with his arms. The helmet to helmet occured as a result of the QB's body dipping because of the intial blow from two defenders...............
Dallas Cowboys
SuperBowl MVPs
Heisman Trophy Winers
<< <i>I was thinking along the same lines with the helmet to helmet question. The difference, I think, is that in OSU vs Michigan the hit was up high (the Michigan player led with his helmet) and in UCLA vs USC the player was a bit lower & led with his arms. The helmet to helmet occured as a result of the QB's body dipping because of the intial blow from two defenders............... >>
Not that it really matters because luckily it wasn't a deciding factor when it was all said and done, but I beg to differ. I TIVO'ed the game because I wasn't sure if I was going to be home to watch it. I've replayed the hit in SlowMo and the USC player, without a doubt, led with the top of his helmet and hit Cowen directly in the side of the helmet. He definitlely had his arms down and the hit was no lower than that in the Michigan game. Further, the other USC player in the play got to Cowen a fraction of a second before the other and had no bearing at all IMO on Cowens body position before the hit. Before that player even touched Cowen, the USC defenders' head was already completely down and approximately a foot from the helmet of Cowen. This hit, in my opinion, was WAY more vicious and dangerous than the hit in the Michigan/OSU game. All of the ref's couldn't have missed this hit.
With that being said, I still don't think this hit was any different than the one that happended in the Michigan game. I don't see where it was really necessary to blow the whistle in either case. The QB was out of the pocket and trying to get extra yards. In both situations, if the QB didn't want to get hit they should have went out of bounds a yard further back instead of trying to stretch it. I believe that as the ref said on the show that I watched, they wont usually call a hit like this with a QB scrambling out of the pocket.