For school we have the following assignment:
Let v be a leaf of graph G. Prove that the following two statements are equivalent: (i) G is a tree, and (ii) G - v is a tree.
The first thing I came up with was this:

However, if you remove the leaf v in this tree you get the following:

This is not a tree anymore, right? Or am I being an idiot? Besides that the only thing related to this question that I could find on the internet was the following answer:
Suppose G is a tree with n vertices and n edges, then G - v has (n-1) vertices and (n-2) edges. Since G is acyclic G - v must also be a tree.
Besides the problem above, should this proof (is it actually a proof?) not say:
Suppose G is a tree with n vertices and n-1 edges, ...
You're exactly correct. Your verbage and wording might need a little finessing, but the ideas are correct.
A tree is defined to be a simple graph with $n$ vertices and $n-1$ edges. Equivocally, a tree is a connected, acyclic graph.
Alternatively, you could prove connectivity by contradiction and acyclicity directly. I think the proof counting the number of vertices and edges is simpler though.