1. The system doesn't favor foreign players, the system favors BETTER players. Right now many of those happen to be international and that makes sense. If you consider the number of competitive junior players in America (not just any kid with a racket and a helicopter mom, but kids that put earnest time and effort into training to play at the next level), it is a fraction of the number kids who play at that level worldwide.
False dichotomy. Its not either / or, its both. Of course, the system has favored better player, but it has also tilted to favor foreign players.
More International players. True. You've to me there. But when the subsidy of foreign players is removed, more American players will be developed.0
2. If a Czech girl comes over at age 21, we are no longer "developing" her. So no, we are not subsidizing the development of Czech tennis. How many women play college tennis and go on to successful WTA tours?
Yes, but, all along, with the old system the Czech player, faced a different return on investment in developing her tennis game. She could try to go pro, and if she did not achieve a successful WTA tour, (most likely, she could still be financial rewarded.
BTW, go check your local graduate school for any of the "hard" disciplines. You're going to find a LOT of internationals. Are you going to tell the UCI graduate math department to quit recruiting internationals too?
Well, I don't think that the UCI math department does recruit many Czech mathematics or engineers, and provide them scholarships.
3. By reducing the number of internationals and diluting the talent level in college tennis, we're only going to make it an even LESS viable path to the ATP/WTA.
That is one possible short term effect. But that negative is more than outweighed by the greater number of American juniors that will enter the sport, as they react to the incentive of more scholarships.
4. College tennis has no debt or duty to American junior tennis. Why should the NCAA (or any individual school) bear the burden of being the dangling carrot for junior tennis players? I'm going to flip it around on you - when the USTA starts subsidizing some of college tennis' costs, then maybe you've got an argument.
Yes, those are strong points. And I'm not sure how to counter them. But when USTA was distancing itself from college tennis, I criticized it for that. I believe Patrick McEnroe is correcting that error.
But for the NCAA, as set quota of for example half internationals, could be burden to getting the best talent. But a six month rule, places everybody on the same footing, enhances amateurism and education. Opps, I've go to go, no time to write more, right now.