In the coming days, we will show love for our fellow man with the Roady's Humanitarian Bowl, soar amongst the treetops with the EagleBank Bowl and gain a fresh perspective from the Insight Bowl.

Our stomachs will growl at the mere mention of the Chick-Fil-A Bowl, the Outback Bowl and the PapaJohns.com Bowl and our hearts and souls will venture to exotic locales in the International Bowl and the Texas Bowl.

Yet, while we bask in the glory that is a postseason matchup between 7-5 teams when we could be dragging through the drudgery of a 16 or 24 team playoff, the teams and young men playing for them aren't the ones grabbing the headlines. Instead, it's their over-worked and pressure-packed head coaches in the unforgiving spotlight.

In a very unofficial and tiny nutshell, here are the college football coaching issues that have arisen in the past weeks: Florida's Urban Meyer resigned due to heart complications only to reassess the situation and take a temporary leave absence with a "gut feeling" that he will coach the Gators next season.

Meanwhile, Texas Tech's Mike Leach allegedly put a concussed player in an electrical closet because he could not practice and Kansas' Mark Mangino's ties to the university were severed because of allegations that he abused players physically and mentally.

To be fair, Meyer was, and is, facing major health concerns and the idea that he could be prowling Gator sidelines as soon as next season should be met with trepidation. As for the actions of Leach and Mangino, if proven true, are inexcusable.

But, what these three instances have in common is that they bring to light the overwhelmingly stress-filled life of a head football coach at a major college. Of course these are incidents occurring at just three of the 119 universities in the Football Bowl Subdivision, but one could infer that related issues are occurring at several other schools around the country.

Coaches of major college football programs are paid quite handsomely, but the work that goes into it and the pressure to succeed are factors that few humans are equipped to deal with. That is why you see people doing things they would otherwise never do.

What can be done about it? The pressure applied from administrators, boosters and fans isn't likely to decrease as football's popularity continues to grow, and a playoff system, so frequently clamored for by fans and media, would probably only serve to increase the pressure. Imagine if the playoffs were open to 16 teams; making the playoffs would then become the benchmark for success. In the current system, at least 34 teams end their seasons on a win with a bowl championship and, thus, some measure of success.

Few would argue that players should somehow have more pressure placed on them in an effort to alleviate some that the coaches feel. These are young men who must also bear the burden of collegiate academics, of which several of them are unprepared in the first place. Besides, if the players aren't getting a financial cut of the astounding sums of money they bring to their universities, why should they do more than is already being asked of them? After all, the players are kids and the coaches are grown men.

It is clear that the NCAA must step in for the health and well-being of its most precious product, for who else has the power to do so? It is a self-serving entity to be sure, but what good comes from the negative press surrounding the struggles facing some of its most recognizable coaches?

The NCAA has created a monstrous cash cow in Division I football. But, in order to maintain its current status of financial prolificacy, it must protect those who work the hardest to make it the great game that it is. The NCAA already imposes limits on numbers of practices and hours per week, so why not limit the amount of time coaches spend in film study, game planning sessions, or on the recruiting trail?

Many of the best coaches are workaholics who are deified for working around the clock, and they deserve credit for doing so. But, maybe college football coaches should all be required to take a month off after the season.

Perhaps the NCAA could create a system in which boosters are limited in the amount of financial support they can provide a coach and his program. This would equalize the resources that college coaches have available to them, would give them no incentive to appease their school's stuffy alumni, and would create a more intriguing on-the-field product where parity and closer levels of competition are nurtured.

The NCAA could do more for its coaches if it chose to do so. Instead, they elect to pat themselves on the back for putting academics first while coaching misconduct and physical endangerment are enabled.

They tell us that playoffs wouldn't work partially because they would interfere with final exams. Please! They have kids play a bowl game on Christmas Eve, but can't find a way around two weeks of final exams?

The sponsors and their wads of money aren't going anywhere. It is time to start doing what is right and commit to the lives and families of the players and coaches who make the NCAA and college football the success that it is.