He can leave whenever he wants. Yes. But he cannot necessarily go wherever he wants. The school to which he signed his life for at least 3 years has that final say.
That's part of what I'm arguing falls under the guise of slavery-esque.
The player, if he wants, can't leave to go to another school if his current one says "no." But coaches can leave under any circumstances as long as someone, whether it's the coach himself or the next institution, pays the buyout.
A coach can leave as long as he or his new institution pays. Why is it fair that the athletes can't? They're required, basically without the ability to mediate, to sign a contract that gives away ownership of their likeness and power to control the location where they work in exchange for what equates to roughly a 50-60 hour work week during football season (football work + classes + class work).
The requirement to sign away the ownership of your likeness and the inability to dictate where you play with the same fickleness of the coaches (who are actually being paid) seems wrong to me. Coaches get to have their cake and eat it too, while the players are locked in by a laundry list of rules.