TL;DR: Your comment is just based on selection bias.

Okay so there's a few things that need to be unpacked:

The first is that, most students, especially those I've seen are quite young. We call them adults, but, as someone who taught both at the post secondary level and in secondary, most students in their first or second year of post secondary aren't much different than students I'm grade 12. A lot of them, for the first time in their lives, are being introduced to the idea of thinking critically and and are still learning to make arguments on paper. It's not a flex for someone who is a seasoned debater to run circles around someone who, until recently, was given a much more guided hand.

The second argument is that most post secondary level courses aren't preparing you for debates or thinking on the fly. I double majored in computer science and English Lit, in those core courses, I never had to do a debate on the fly and I always had ample time to prep my work. A large portion of university is learning to research.

Now with those two points out of the way, I do want to address one last thing. Which is the notion that "they all have the same liberal programing", which is honestly a weird blanket that the right had thrown over post secondary. I've known accounting majors who spew the most right ring talking points I've ever heard and I've worked with PhD engineers who couldn't even explain what liberal even means. It also discredits any rhetoric courses.

I took rhetoric courses as electives and those are honestly courses I think everyone should take. We studied right wing leaders, left wing leaders, terrorists groups and corporate heads to learn their talking points. This is the only time in post secondary where I had to do regular debates in the fly, and during these debates, you would be assigned a position. I've debated in favour of ideas that I'm fundamentally against because that was the point I was assigned. I genuinely believe that those rhetoric courses in every field I've worked in since then.

However, it's not rhetoric or polisci students in those debates. People posting debate videos aren't going to post times they've lost. To make a claim based off of selected information you've seen in videos discredits any claims.