[d4cohn]

Are those students receiving a paid-for education? Did they sign a contract stating what their responsibilities were in exchange for their music or other talents? If they did, then my position wouldn't change.

I don't see bowl games as meaningless. I see them as part of the football season, and if a player is medically cleared to play and chooses not to then I think they are breaching that contract and there should be consequences for doing so. I think the scholarship should be revoked for that school year, and the student should no longer be entitled to any benefits afforded a scholarship athlete above and beyond those of any other (paying) student.

What about all of the coaches that leave before bowl games for new jobs? Should they lose their salary for that season, and actually have to pay their own buyout, as opposed to just getting their new school to give them extra money and foot the bill? And unlike student-athletes, coaches are employees with employee contracts.

I have been equally critical of this in the past and think the NCAA should ban interviewing for coaching positions until after the championship game. As far as their contracts, it comes down to the terms. If they breach their contract, then the school should seek remedies they would be entitled to under the contract. If the contract didn't cover these circumstances, then that's a bad agreement.

I think that would run afoul of many employment provisions.

Coaches can be fired at any time for any reason; I don’t see why they can’t leave at any time for any reason, including because someone else will pay them more.

Coaches are free to leave at any time, but they are under contract, so they would have to buyout the remaining years on their contract in order to leave. But since the new school that they are going to always throws in extra cash to pay for the buyout, the coach can just leave if he wants to; there is no actual deterrent/consequence of the coach leaving (other than the coach getting a better payday).

Nothing is going to change on the front of coaches leaving before bowl games; I just don't believe it is inherently fair to hold students (who are not employees) to a higher standard than employed adults.

[d4cohn]

Are those students receiving a paid-for education? Did they sign a contract stating what their responsibilities were in exchange for their music or other talents? If they did, then my position wouldn't change.

I don't see bowl games as meaningless. I see them as part of the football season, and if a player is medically cleared to play and chooses not to then I think they are breaching that contract and there should be consequences for doing so. I think the scholarship should be revoked for that school year, and the student should no longer be entitled to any benefits afforded a scholarship athlete above and beyond those of any other (paying) student.

What about all of the coaches that leave before bowl games for new jobs? Should they lose their salary for that season, and actually have to pay their own buyout, as opposed to just getting their new school to give them extra money and foot the bill? And unlike student-athletes, coaches are employees with employee contracts.

I have been equally critical of this in the past and think the NCAA should ban interviewing for coaching positions until after the championship game. As far as their contracts, it comes down to the terms. If they breach their contract, then the school should seek remedies they would be entitled to under the contract. If the contract didn't cover these circumstances, then that's a bad agreement.

I think that would run afoul of many employment provisions.

Coaches can be fired at any time for any reason; I don’t see why they can’t leave at any time for any reason, including because someone else will pay them more.

Coaches are free to leave at any time, but they are under contract, so they would have to buyout the remaining years on their contract in order to leave. But since the new school that they are going to always throws in extra cash to pay for the buyout, the coach can just leave if he wants to; there is no actual deterrent/consequence of the coach leaving (other than the coach getting a better payday).

Nothing is going to change on the front of coaches leaving before bowl games; I just don't believe it is inherently fair to hold students (who are not employees) to a higher standard than employed adults.