Very few people will make it in pro tennis. The pros are different animals than the rest of us. Have you ever been to any junior USTA boys/girls tournaments lately? I can tell you that just about everyone of them do private lessons, clinics, members of either health clubs or country clubs, etc.... The parents are either very well off or wealthy. Parents are either doctors, lawyers or engineers. Go ahead and look up any of the mid-atlantic tournaments and you can see that the majority of the kids either live in Fairfaix, Montomery or Ashburn areas which are expensive. How many kids in the tournament do you notice NOT from Baltimore city or Prince George County (aka ghetto areas)?
Are you kidding me? I don't think Stanford would have accepted Toby Gerhart if he was just a regular A student with less than 1300 on the SAT had he not playing football. Btw, Gerhart became one of the Heismain finalist in his senior year. Your statement about Football and BB sports have higher graduation rates than regular students bodies, you need to talk to the University of North Carolina about the huge cheating scandal about football and basketball players. Take a look at the requirements for acceptance between football/bb players in the PAC-12:
https://thehuskyhaul.com/2012/05/16...ance-rates-of-athletes-to-the-general-public/
FB/BB players "might", and it is debatable, have higher graduation rates than the regular student bodies but their majors completely worthless, like sports management, African studies, etc... That's why they are not prepared for the real world. Tell you what, as someone who did tutoring with student athlete in college in math/chemistry/physics, I can tell you that 99.99% of football/BB players don't even know how to do Algebra II and the word bunsen burner seems foreign to them. Btw, I went to college when the NCAA used to have prop 48, you should look that up but here is a little snippet: "
The NCAA enacted Proposition 48 in 1986. ... Prop 48 mandates that in order for a student-athlete to qualify to play in Division I athletics as a Freshman, the athlete must carry a minimum 2.0 grade point average (GPA) in 11 core courses and a combined 700 score on the SAT." Now you tell me if anyone can survive at UCLA or Notre Dame with 2.0 GPA in high school and 700 on the SAT. Btw, in SAT, you start out at 400. You remember Tony Rice, the famous quaterback who won the National Championship for Notre Dame in 1988? He is the prop 48 poster child.
In football/bb, nobody cares about schools outside of the Power-5 conference. You should also ask Khalil Mack if he ever graduated from University of Buffalo. Watching his interviews on TV, he sound like a man with an 7th grade education.
Trying hard to get you to look at things a little differently, because in many ways we are on the same page, but I differ from you in perceptions. I'll try again:
According to the NCAA, average sports graduation rates stand around 70% (I mentioned the actual stat and link above), thats in a 5 year period. For just the regular student body, its about 59%. This takes in all schools participating in NCAA sports. This would tell me that there are benefits to sports engagement for students who participate, and that sports can help in the development of students. Again, looking at data and not individual sensationalized ESPN news coverage.
Reference to U of Buff has nothing to do with an individual player, but the fact that the athletic department has POURED money into their football program in hoops of getting a return. Like many MAC schools, this has backfired and caused them to be in the red thus impacting other sports (they recently cut Baseball). Its an example, but the general perception that football is some mass money maker is a misunderstanding of college sports. There are a handful of schools that make money off their football and basketball programs, and the others suffer under the weight of the elephant called "expensive" sports that rate no revenue. Add in budgets for more women's sports and equal scholarships, and you see why many schools had to cut their mens tennis teams (Colorado, Kansas, Kansas State, West Virginia, Pitt, Syracuse, Washington State, Oregon State, I could go on and on...) They blame title nine, and that certainly plays a small role, but it really is the demands of keeping up with the Jones's on the football front. U of Buff is a classic example of what has happened and there are lots of links an articles to find if you look. SIU Edwardsville is a another great example recently where "revenue" sports have become budget drainers and killed off the other sports programs. Just in your community do some research on the University of Maryland tennis program, oh forgot, they killed it. How about UMBC, yup that ones gone too.
For tennis success, yes, some money backing can help some players get the additional training they need. Every sport has expensive camps and equipment (a huge business) that their parents chase in order to fulfill their kids (and their) dream. Yes, I am very familiar with Jr tennis on all levels, and certainly there are many successful kids who got there because their parents could afford "extra's". Do you think Payton and Eli Manning got to where they are by growing up in the ghetto? Its in every sport. Parents who have money will pay to get their kids to be great, but to make blanket statements and say things like "Dr's and Lawyers" plays into the stereotypes of tennis from yesteryear, and does a disservice to the sport and people trying to learn about it. Plus, isn't entirely accurate. And, the majority of success stories come through mentorship, and not money. Hard to put data on that, but just my personal experience with the sport (over 35 years). I think the sport needs more of this, but instead we just make it harder for Jr's to get it, and more expensive.
So, back to the premise of the thread "idiots playing college tennis". Sure, there are bad students, and "rich" kids out there that get in schools on tennis, just like they do in any sport they can. But, as we are all tennis fans and want the game to grow we can certainly take some solace that tennis isn't a sport that breads that kind of behavior, at least statistically. Maybe your community in Maryland gives that perception, but around the country its a great sport to play that needs more support from all of us, and has a ton of hanging fruit for potential. Tennis teaches mental toughness, handling adversity, winning, losing, championship mentality, playing individually, playing with a team, time management, concentration; and not to mention extreme athleticism not seen in many sports. Did I mention the sport can be a tool to played your whole life bringing key social skills into play? Should be an awesome sport for any kid to get into, but instead we treat it like a recreation sport played by foreigners, sissy's and rich kids, even though success nowadays isn't predicated on those things. The end result, we change scores, try to make everyone a winner, try to understand it with the lens of how we understand other high school sports, and create false narratives about players in order to explain what we don't understand.
This thread is so dumb, it makes me angry it would even be asked or argued, but I feel a strong obligation to at least help others understand the perspective. Data is data, and all it shows is that there are a lot of tennis players out there from many diverse backgrounds who compete for their schools, go to class, have good grades, and are great representatives of the sport. Yes, you can cherry pick out whatever you want, but the data speaks otherwise. Do your own research, look at different successful players, I think you will be amazed at the results and be proud of the sport we all love. 
but come on cool tennis kids??? Oxymoron??? Off subject a bit, but this is my observation and probably stereotyping...
