One difference is a student realizes they are failing during the semester. I almost lost my scholarship once because I blew a couple of tests early in the semester. But I knew I was in danger of losing it and what grades I needed to make to keep it. The problem is a coach doesn't have to be upfront & honest with a player during the spring... he can string him along until the last minute. I think if a player gets cut solely for under performing, he should get some kind of notice (in writing so that there is hard evidence) that he's not performing up to par before the spring or fall and that his scholarship may not be renewed the following year. Then he's given the choice to transfer at that time or take a chance at improving & keeping his spot. It's total BS to cut a guy - with no prior notice - a few weeks before fall practice.<div>
</div><div>The player gets hurt for not being worthy of a scholarship, but the coach is who signed him up. The coach recruited him and made the decision he was worthy of a spot on the team. But a year later when the guy is buried at #4 on the depth chart because he's not as talented as the coach thought he was, the player is the only one affected by getting dumped and forced to find a new team at the last minute. The coach is in no way penalized for making the mistake of signing him in the first place (other than wasting a year coaching the guy).</div><div>
</div><div>If a player can't transfer & play immediately, I'd like to see a rule that if you cut a player for under performing - that scholarship can't be given out for a year. If the player has to be penalized a year, then so should the school.</div>
