Also, COBOL work is kinda crap. Debugging 20-year-old Java code sucks, but a 40-year-old COBOL project, with source code backed up to 5-inch floppy disks - forget about it. (I just watched the trailer for 'The Many Saints of Newark'. LOL)
I guess there just aren't enough takers.
The old -- and likely not so bad -- advice if you'd like to learn how to use a Mainframe is: Get access to a one, get a copy of latest Red Book [2], and start playing around :)
[1]: https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/z/education/zxplore (this isn't the program I went through, but my old bookmark now redirects here)
[2]: https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg248852.html (IBMs mainframe Technical Guides traditionally have a red cover)
The pays for COBOL do not even look that compelling and you are walking down a dead end when these systems finally modernize. I wouldn't touch cobol for anything short of $300k and the promise of enough work that I could retire within a few years.
They don't have enough work to train them on and whatever they have is actually critical enough to need someone experienced.
My partner was hired to be a COBOL programmer right out of college in 2004 & trained to work on AS/400s.
The problem was that everything was a small part of a big project, but you got no experience building a big project over its lifetime to see how it should be done. And on top of it, a lot of things which were "the right way" in 1991 wasn't so great in 2005. So a lot of work was actually bringing the existing work to code before you could do the tiny bit of work which is actually needed.