I have nothing concrete to back up this opinion, but I’d be stunned if fewer than 95% of NFL players and 75% of D-1 college players were on steroids, excluding kickers and punters.[/quote]
And I’ll tell you, categorically, that you are wrong. I played for two years at a major D-I school before transferring to a D-I-AA and there was only ONE person who has even using pro-hormones. Within my two years, he was caught. No one even touched steroids. You guys are looking at the stakes are too high argument the wrong way - the stakes are too high to GET caught. This stuff was openly talked about too, so I would have known. Guys used to ask me all the time about GH, etc. because it was UNDETECTABLE. But no one had the budget for that. It was mostly the O/D-lineman who would ask. But they never wanted to risk it with sauce. As a humorous aside, I used to advise and design legal supplement stacks for a current prominent young NFL quarterback.
The only window of opportunity would be the summer - if you studied abroad. Even if you did not participate in offseason summer training (and this was a small group composed mostly of walk-ons, for scholarship players it is basically mandatory), the NCAA can still subpoena you for a drug-test while you are home. I knew of a linebacker buddy who studied in England and ran a Winstrol cycle while he was overseas, but that was it.
I would imagine that in the pro ranks, there is slightly more room for error, but not much. To give you an idea, I was drug tested (urine) by the NCAA 6-10 times as best I can recall within three semesters, and there were more street drug tests (hair) administered by the school itself.
You guys need to remember that those players in college who are going to go pro are those who are good FOOTBALL players, not necessarily those who are the strongest or leanest. They can get by on talent alone. Some starters cared less about working out. It was a nuisance that they tolerated; a necessary evil, nothing more.