Quote: Mugwump "Yeah, sure - the Bulls were a big side. But let's not forget that a lot of their success was based on everyone else being nowhere near as big and physical.
Wingers topping out over 6'3 was a rarity in that league. There are countless in SL today. We even have a guy playing at 6'7 (Mantellato).
I remember when John Harrison - a second row and sum-time prop - was considered a freak of nature at that height.
Look at the size of our pack. How many of our forwards are 6'3? Greenwood, LMS, Walmsley, probably Vea.
I'm not sure why I'm arguing this point because ANYONE involved in junior development will know kids are handled far better these days. They eat better. They train better. They train smarter. All this has a knock-on effect in terms of size.
I taught two kids in Wigan (both of whom were on Saints books four or five years ago). At age 13 Saints had already given them an advanced training plan. By year 10 they were bloody enormous. I remember speaking to Ian Lucas & Mark Welsby (both ex-Wigan players) who both said they'd struggle to compete physically against the kids in their cohort.
When I was a kid I thought no-one could get bigger than Mal Meninga. Today Meninga wouldn't rank as big in some teams.'"
Depends how far you go back mate. When it was a part time profession there wasn't as many 'conditioned' big lads so I would agree with your point. However I'd say post 96, the players quickly got much bigger. Bradford certainly set a benchmark for size in 97 though. Didn't stop us grinding them down in the challenge cup final in the rain though
