Ohio State coaches and officials had a chance to make a statement, set a precedent, send a message, show some intestinal fortitude, etc. by opting to sit five players, including Heisman candidate Terrell Pryor, in the Sugar Bowl against Arkansas.   It appears that the decision to allow the five Buckeyes to play was more about money, TV ratings, and winning, rather than the integrity of college athletics, the Ohio State program, and this bowl game.  

Terrell Pryor and four others are suspended for the first five games of the 2011 season (appeals will come, of course), but were allowed to play in a BCS game against Arkansas.  Almost everyone I've talked to cannot understand how Terrell Pryor, Solomon Thomas (who had a game-clinching interception) and company weren't benched.

Most of the articles I've read and discussions heard on television have been around the NCAA and its inconsistency in its rulings, and that since Terrell Pryor and others claim they did not know their actions were against NCAA rules, suspensions would not be enforced until the 2011 season.  Regardless of the NCAA's ruling on the eligibility of the Ohio State players for the bowl game, Ohio State's coaching staff had an opportunity to show its character.  Instead, OSU coach Jim Tressel gave the impression that winning a bowl game against an SEC team was top priority.   

One might argue that to maintain the integrity of the Sugar bowl game, Pryor and others were rightfully allowed to play to create a 'fair fight' in OSU's biggest game of the season.   I'd argue that one slip up in any of the first five games of the 2011 season could cost Ohio State a shot at next year's national championship game, and are more significant than a loss to Arkansas would have been to the program.  Doesn't Ohio State's win against the SEC seem tainted?

In a separate issue, Virginia Tech coach Frank Beamer suspended several key players, including running back and kickoff specialist David Wilson, for the first quarter of the Orange Bowl against 4th ranked Stanford for being out of their rooms after their 1 am curfew on New Year's Eve.  These players were in their hotel, just not in their rooms.  Clearly these two stories aren't apples and apples, but it just shows that not everyone is caught up in winning, ratings, and hype surrounding the 'big game', at the cost of integrity.   

Maybe the bigger issue here is with the NCAA and inconsistencies in penalties.  But regardless of the actions from the NCAA, Ohio State had their say, they chose not to act, and they won their big game.  The question is, was it worth it?