The USTA document linked above is very biased in favour of college. The underlying reality is that from a financial point of view, in all but the most exceptional cases, going to university/ college even without a scholarship makes more sense than playing professional tennis. The chances of making a profit overall on a pro career in tennis are dreadful, and likely to get worse as the sport continues to globalise while it continues to be the case that only ATP and WTA tournaments offer prize funds that cover expenses. But the USTA's inference that you can go to college and still have every chance of making it to the top in tennis is unproven and bordering on dishonest. They can point to Isner, and who else? And Isner is an over-ranked player who picks up most of his points by beating up low-ranked players in weak field events in his home country.

Until college players start winning grand slams, which hasn't happened for decades, choosing college will look to the most ambitious teenagers like a cushy way of giving up the dream of really making it in tennis, and I agree with them. But I wouldn't object to a young relation of mine mugging the Americans for a college scholarship, I think they are fools to lavish so much money on young foreigners simply out of inter-collegiate vanity.

its all about uni 'snakebite tennis' in te uk