Now see, I don't see these situations as remotely connected.
One case (tOSU) involved a group of talented but judgment-impaired athletes who were enticed to provide goods and services in order to secure improper benefits not available to the general student population.
The other involves a silly, self-absorbed, talent-impaired peckerwood with a penchant for self-aggrandizement, who paid for his own ink, since nobody else had any interest in participating in the economics of the transaction.
Questions?