If it is not clear from my two obituraries, let me add the following regarding why college tennis does not rise to the level of being considered a rite of passage.

The stark reality is that beginning with Wimbledon in 1877, the U.S. Open in 1881, the French Open in 1891, and the Australian Open in 1905, the number of players to have won a grand slam tournament in singles and have obtained a college degree before doing so are, if at all, few and
far between. 

Further, imagine you are talking tennis with any of these individuals - Rene Lacoste, Fred Perry, Ken Rosewall, Rod Laver, Lew Hoad, John Newcombe, Fred Stolle, Roy Emerson, Jimmy Connors, Ilie Năstase, Bjorn Borg, Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, Ivan Lendl, Thomas Muster, Andre Agassi, Andrés Gómez, Pete Sampras, Goran Ivanišević, Mats Wilander, Guillermo Vilas, Yannick Noah, Gustavo Kuerten, Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, Carlos Alcaraz, or Jannik Sinner - and you want to distinguish yourself with any of your collegiate accomplishments that you believe to somehow be noteworthy.  None of the aforementioned have a college degree.  End of story!

Summing up, for purposes of comparing players from different eras (i.e., each age group representing a different era) and for assessing the “depth” of an era, the question to be answered after applying the rites of passage test is did you or someone from your age group win a grand slam tournament in singles.  See June 22, 2025 obituary for rites of passage.  For instance, being ranked one or 100 in the nation at 12 or 18 ends up being particularly irrelevant if no one from the age group went on to win a grand slam tournament in singles.  Such eras have no “depth.”