Two days ago, Syracuse Orange head coach Doug Marrone publicly said that Marquis Spruill would not miss the upcoming Pinstripe Bowl despite his recent arrest in which he allegedly assaulted a police officer.
A lot of people voiced their displeasure and/or confusion.
Two days later, after a "complete assessment of the facts," SU announced that Spruill "will not play a significant portion of the upcoming bowl game."
In other words, the powers-that-be agreed with a lot of SU fans when it came to the apparent lack of punishment and forced Marrone to step it up. Though one can argue how much of a punishment this is. Presumably, Spruill will probably be limited to playing the second half of the game, which just means he'll be well-rested for when we need him most.
If this were basketball, the threat of not starting wouldn't even be a punishment.
Steve Rene, who was also involved in the arrest but is unable to play in the Pinstripe Bowl, will face the same punishment for his first game, presumably the first game of the 2013 season.
All in all, while the punishment isn't steep, it's probably the right call for Marrone and SU. Given the allegations, the decision to let Spruill play was at odds with most every similar situation that came before it. Still unresolved, and likely something that will remain unresolved, is the explanation by Doug Marrone of his shift in terms of player punishment since he took over the program.
I'm not saying it's wrong or unfair, I'd just love to hear him explain his thought process.