Interesting that they're suspended for their first five games of 2011 vs. the likes of SW Missouri State, but not for the bowl game. Can somebody explain to me this rationale?
If that's the case, isn't it Ohio State's own fault for not educating their players? If the NCAA accepts the fact that individual players shouldn't punished for Ohio State's lack of education, then why are they suspended for five games in 2011? Makes no sense to me. Either they are at fault, or they aren't. You can't say they're at fault "somewhat" so we'll suspend them only for games that are more convenient for them to miss....I'm not saying they should be suspended for the bowl game necessarily, just that the penalty should make sense and not be dependent on the upcoming matchups. Pryor will probably be turning pro anyways so won't miss any games.The players are eligible for the bowl game because the NCAA determined they did not receive adequate rules education during the time period the violations occurred, Lennon said.
Edit: Also, I find it somewhat humorous that players could easily sell their merchandise/awards once they graduate without any repercussions (as far as I know it's not illegal to sell possessions), just not when they're in school. But I understand the premise behind the rule.