If you like Occam's Razor, then you're gonna love this argument. They don't make 'em much simpler than this.
First things first, here is a link to the rulebook: http://www.ncaapublications.com/prod...loads/FR09.pdf (Link). If that link doesn't open up a PDF file for you, then copy and paste this link your browser and you can download the PDF from the page that comes up: http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-3926-2009-10-ncaa-football-rules-and-interpretations-2-year-publication.aspx (Link).
The rule in question is rule 11-1-1. It can be found at page 142 (of 272) of the linked PDF file. It states as follows:
The officials’ jurisdiction begins 60 minutes before the scheduled kickoff
and ends when the referee declares the score final [S14].
Seems pretty straightforward, right? Also of note is that the rulebook specifically enumerates -- at page 19 (of 272) of the linked PDF -- rule 11-1-1 as "an administrative rule that cannot be altered". Well that's cool. We've got a rule that is squarely on point and appears to be completely dispositive when applied to the facts. And on top of that....it's also apparently engraved on a stone tablet. This would appear to further strengthen the argument that the NCAA is pretty darn serious about making sure there is never more than one "game over" call per game.
How is this anything other than the end of the analysis? The game was expressly called. Thus, the game is over at the point it was expressly called. Thus, Vols win 20-17. Everything that happened after the referee called the game was nothing more than a scrimmage. Because at that point -- per this extremely straightforward NCAA rule -- the game was over. The offiicials therefore had no authority to do anything other than grab their jackets and proceed to the nearest exit in an orderly fashion. They no longer had jurisdiction.
I cannot state this emphatically enough. Once the game was called, the officials -- and the rule does not distinguish between on-field and off-field officials -- are no longer officials. You and your buddies could dress up like officials and run on the field after the ref calls the game, and you have just as much authority to review the previous play as the actual refs; namely, you would have zero authority.
Why is there an elephant in my room? Why is this elephant so very very large?
Unless there is another provision that specifically states an exception to this rule for replay officials -- and I can't find one, but I invite everyone to take a stab and see if you can find something on point -- then the Vols won the game 20-17.
PS -- And I would support the utilization of any and all available procedural channels by which this argument might be advanceable