Ohio State players facing five-game suspensions next season would not have traveled with the team to the Allstate Sugar Bowl if they had not pledged to return in 2011, coach Jim Tressel said on Thursday.
The five players, including quarterback Terrelle Pryor, have been punished by the NCAA for selling championship rings and memorabilia and taking discounts from a tattoo parlor.
Tressel said he wanted to make sure that the players wouldn't "skirt the consequences" by playing in the Sugar Bowl, then declaring for the NFL draft and avoiding any punishment.
"We told them they would have to make the decision on the NFL prior to leaving for the bowl game," Tressel said at his first Sugar Bowl news conference. "It wouldn't be fair to not face the consequences down the road."...
Four sold their 2008 Big Ten championship rings for $1,000 to $1,200 apiece; Herron sold his football jersey, pants and shoes for $1,000; and [defensive end] Solomon [Thomas] and Pryor each sold his "gold pants" trinket -- given to Buckeyes players if they beat Michigan -- for several hundred dollars. Pryor also sold a 2009 Fiesta Bowl sportsmanship award.
Tressel said he was disappointed not only because his players broke the rules, but also because they sold what he thought of as important keepsakes from their football careers.Obviously I've got complex feelings about the NCAA and its policies. I don't think that they should punish players for selling jerseys (or other paraphernalia) while allowing the universities and corporate sponsors to profit from doing the same. So, in isolation, I think that any punishment of the Ohio State players for these violations is unjust. However, I am all for consistency, and the treatment of the Ohio State players in comparison to A.J. Green smacks of favoritism by the NCAA and cowering to corporate interests (despite their denials, which rely on such badly flawed logic that they're not even worth dignifying with a response here).
Luckily, Ohio State has stepped up and ensured that their players do face some punishment (as I wrote earlier this week, the NCAA's "punishment" left open the possibility that the players could escape repercussions entirely by declaring for the NFL Draft). Will Ohio State benefit from having those players around for the second half of next season, instead of not at all? Sure. But I'm not quite cynical enough to think that's the real (or at least, the only) reason they took this course of action. I think they did the right thing here, and made a statement in favor of equal punishment for equal crimes. Good for them.
[ESPN.com]
I had the opposite reaction to this news. I saw this as Ohio State holding the players careers hostage. Basically saying you come back or you never play another college game again. This is another win for the BCS system, and Ohio State, not the students involved.
ReplyDeleteYour take is a valid one, and I think it shows how complicated and screwy the world of college football has become--it's at times nearly impossible to determine what "doing the right thing" really looks like. We (as fans, at least) want to ensure that our student-athletes aren't being brutally taken advantage of by corporate and institutional interests, but we also want to maintain competitive fairness, so as not to penalize those who are following the rules versus those who are not.
ReplyDeleteYou're right that the players are being given an ultimatum, but is it better to say "choose a one-bowl game suspension and an NFL career OR choose a five-game suspension as a senior" or instead to say "you can escape punishment from breaking the rules entirely as long as you pray at the corporate altar of the Sugar Bowl"? I don't know--neither seems particularly palatable to me.
Realistically, the players' careers are being held hostage regardless of their behavior with respect to NCAA rules, which is ultimately the argument that you are making. They have no choice to embark on an NFL career unless they have first played college football and catered to the whim of the NCAA. That's a huge problem, and one that I have repeatedly said needs to be addressed. But until it is, the best we can do is to ensure that those who do break the (admittedly unjust) rules are held accountable in one form or another, so that we are not penalizing the rule-followers by proxy.
Of course, further complicating matters is the fact that skipping the Sugar Bowl (and declaring for the NFL Draft) would mean passing up the lucrative corporate swag bags that players receive for playing in the games (no idea how those are allowed, but you can read about it here: http://bit.ly/h3lERF). The NCAA--where it's never been more difficult to separate the heroes from the villains.