[winflop]

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.

The student athletes do not get paid market rates for their participation in football. I support that (I want there to continue to be amateurism in college sports). But one downside of that is that as this fact becomes more nakedly apparent, and the players with the largest gap between their market value and what they are being “paid” (scholarship) realize it, they are increasingly opting not provide their services.  And while I don’t like it, 
there really is not much that I think should be done about it.

BC

This could certainly be implemented. The NCAA could rule that no member school could interview any candidates for coaching positions until after the national championship game. Doesnt prevent them from firing coaches nor does it prevent coaches from leaving. Or they could say you can't hire anyone (or announce it) until after the last game.

Not saying it will happen, but it could be done.

[winflop]

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.

The student athletes do not get paid market rates for their participation in football. I support that (I want there to continue to be amateurism in college sports). But one downside of that is that as this fact becomes more nakedly apparent, and the players with the largest gap between their market value and what they are being “paid” (scholarship) realize it, they are increasingly opting not provide their services.  And while I don’t like it, 
there really is not much that I think should be done about it.

BC

This could certainly be implemented. The NCAA could rule that no member school could interview any candidates for coaching positions until after the national championship game. Doesnt prevent them from firing coaches nor does it prevent coaches from leaving. Or they could say you can't hire anyone (or announce it) until after the last game.

Not saying it will happen, but it could be done.