Yes he's big

In answer to the OP

No. Not a chance.

Some coaches like to bandy phrases like "lightweight mobile pack" but they are synonyms for "beaten pack". Just look at the Giants at the back end of last season, regularly beaten by any team with a decent set of forwards

Rugby League is still the same game I essence. The pack needs to gain dominance in the midfield to allow the halfbacks space to get the backs into space.

Note as well the consensus that props don't hit their best till their late 20s means you just don't get "young props" that often, those that are can be called exceptional.

Look at the set of props England could pick and all of them are top notch and as good as any that's gone before.

I think it's a deeper set issue than just game development. Our players are full-time professionals now so lard diets are out of the window. Everybody is big these days and not just props.

Not all props are big look at P Gallen not the biggest but i would say the best.

and here is a few more Wiki,Pongia,Assotasi,all these guys 6ft and all just over 100kgs.

You could add that there hasn't been a genuine prop in the sense of the name - i.e. propping up a scrum - in RL since contested scrums went (quite a few were blown away when the 6th tackle scrum was ditched as well, which made scrums far less important anyway). Kevin Ward was to the Chisnalls, Pitchfords etc what Peacock is to him - i.e. not a 'real' prop at all.

Paul Gallen is the same size as Kevin Ward.

There is a leaning by some NRL clubs to have more mobile props. So they're using second rowers and locks to fill those positions.

Yeah and they lose to teams with big props

NSW has a light pack, Queensland doesn't.

It is an evolving position , unlike union where they stil need a fat imobile prop.

Not to mention QLD having the likes of Slater, Cronk, Thurston, Inglis, and Smith in their team. You'd think NSW would simply pick a few bigger blokes if it were that simple. Origin isn't 1997 SL when the big Bulls team swept all before them because the rest of the league couldn't handle their physicality (tellingly the Bulls then failed to win a single game in the expanded WCC).

Is it the reduction in the number of replacements in a game that is pushing us to reduce their size and keep them on the field longer?

Maybe a push for a faster more expansive game in SL is contributing. Watching Graham play he probably passes more than he takes it in.

Well we got there in the end, the game has changed, big barging Props are a thing of the past, Hill like Graham has good ball handling skills and off loads, also mobile and fit enough not to be ' spotted ' and also able to play up to the full 80 minutes if required

Wigan and GB legend Brian McTigue played prop in the 50s and 60's.

He was fast on his feet, a ball player, and physically very strong. As well as being an ex-boxer.

McTigue scored a try at Wembley in the early 60's, shot through the defence like a bullet. It's on the web somewhere, don't think it's on youtube though.

So not all were big barging props in the past.

I think that one reason the op thinks that props are a thing of the past is the fact that, most of the other positions
ie second row, centre, wing are now played by blokes who are the best part 16 stone which is about the weight of an old school prop.
The fact is that all of the modern league players are bigger and physically stronger than their counterparts from say 20 years ago.
We do miss some of the handling skills, but the game is more power based these days and there is no doubt that some of the craft has gone.

With 4 subs on the bench, usually 3 "props" and a hooker, the players can attack in the same style for most of the full 80 mins, with the forwards knocking holes in the defensive line and then scoring through advantage in attacking numbers or pace through a gap in the line.

The "props" are still doing a job, its just the game that has changed.