1-2 years might do more damage than you think, especially if the NCAA gives the players unrestricted right to transfer. Say they get a 2 year ban. They are starting over literally from scratch. No coaches, no players, just a tarnished legacy. How many established coaches will want to start from square one, with no players whatsoever? And then how many blue chippers are going to want to play for what will likely be a pathetic team for several years? Which means that coach is developing good at best talent for the first many years.
While I would love to see a 5+ year hiatus, even one will be extremely damaging. Look at SMU. Now, I'm not saying Penn St = SMU (that would be an insult to SMU, well, except for Craig James and the dead hookers thing), but even a one year ban would be something Penn St doesn't recover too quickly from.
You're right, Penn St. isn't SMU. Penn St. will STILL recover way quicker than SMU, because they are THE football program in that state. It's not like Pitt is going to become some powerhouse in two years that captures the hearts of Pennsylvania. I'll bet that PSU would pull a monster recruiting class its first year back, unless they faced several years of reduced scholarship even after returning.