Legends...
Bit of a creaky one, for me, as we've not had too many that's done any kind of longevity, from my time of watching, whilst holding down a great career. for me, you have to do a minimum of 5 or 6 seasons for qualification.
I'll have to take Parry Gordon and Mike Nicholas as a given, as I didn't see that much of their career.
Hesford,BevanJ, GregoryM are legends. Maybe Jacko, Kelly and Dessie , too.
The rest are "club greats", legends may be a term to high for some.
Briers. Frittered away the first 12 years of his career. What might have been
Davies and Bateman 2and 5 years, not long enough for me
Boyd and Morley. Similar, add their injury problems. Nah.
GregoryA. Only 2 years, and did the dirty on us
Johnson 3 years
Westwood, Forster and Cullen. Great clubmen, but were limited players for chunks of their careers.
I've missed off a few, too Mann, Tamati, Roberts (injury finished him), Duane (injury hampered him)
Sculthorpe was a mere babe when he left (with disciplinary problems) and Harris engineered a move for himself. Plus our financial situation didn't help at the time. Had things been different, they may have stayed. If my auntie had testicles, etc.

Sorry if I've upset some on here. Club greats is an appropriate title for many of these. Legends? Not for me.

Fair comment, I don't think that anyone could be upset by your opinion and FWIW Club Greats/Club Legend whats the real difference if it relates to a club? Yes I read the qualification process in your post but you could surely arrive for a short stay one or two seasons and totally transform a team's fortunes.

It's not as if the thread title or subsequent posting has any reference to that really over used term World Class

I think there is a difference between a great and a legend, Rico.
Several that I've mentioned also fit into your transformation idea. The Peter Higham buys of Boyd, Tamati, GregoryA, Blake, Johnson gave us a massive fillip, especially after the Bowden 84/5 debacle.
The signing of Gleeson and John's upped our profile by a million percent, likewise Langer, Nickau, McCurrie and Gee.

The term World Class is thrown about like wedding confetti, these days. When I've witnessed the likes of Langer, Meninga, Hanley, Robinson, Daley, Fittler, in the flesh, I shuddered.. The Aussie midweek teams were a joy to watch in those days, too.
Don't get me wrong, Lockyer, Slater, Smith et al are world class, but with the rugby of the last decades being a tad robotic, I can't bracket them together.

Terrible fella, me

Absolutely lefty, the entertainment business is so full of mediocrity that anything slightly above banal is elevated to genius level and anything that suggests a hint of talent or longevity is awarded legendary status.

I have been fortunate to see players that deserved the legend tag because they were one-offs, freaks, possessed of supernatural abilities. Players who rack up years of dedicated service deserve to be recognised but legends .... no.

Sadly many of the people I'd call legends never donned P&B - Hanley, Offiah etc.

Those that did, for however short a period, dragged lesser-skilled players to hitherto unknown performance levels either by virtue of their incredible, unique skill (Langer, Davies) or their incredible leaders of men charisma (M. Greg).

This.
Your first paragraph sums up today's modern day acceptance of something that merely passes muster, now gets that irritating label of AMAAAYYYYZING.

Typical example from recent years. Richard Whiting at Hull. Don't get me wrong, a decent player. But he was being touted as a potential MoS by the great and the good on Sky. You hype something up, and the gullible will swallow it up, like a drunk will cheap cider.

The topic is Wire Legends, not World Legends. No right or wrong answer, this really is about opinions, you may not agree with someone (e.g. I don't agree with the idea of Murphy as anywhere near the best Scrum half we've had [when he played for us]) but as long as the opinion is genuinely held, fair play to them.

Morrissey and Lefty...you two need to get a room.

Great minds think alike

OK, results in and 74% of just 641 total votes went from Brett Hodgson at full back. mobile.twitter.com/wolvesrl/stat ... ign=buffer

OK, results in and 74% of just 641 total votes went from Brett Hodgson at full back. mobile.twitter.com/wolvesrl/stat ... ign=buffer

Well,that number of votes is poor in terms of being representative of the fan base. Why has the vote been restricted to twitter users?

I think it is fair to say that opinions of players & hero worship stems from the early viewing days of young fans. I started watching in the 60s when the team weren't great by any means although they usually gave touring teams a good game. I suppose my legends would be no more than just club men... Payne,Winslade,Dickens,Brady ,Gilfedder,Gordon & others & i also thought Conroy was an amazing full back.

Apparently Wires have 78,000 Twitter followers, more than 77,000 of which weren't engaged enough to get involved with the legends vote.

Which perhaps says something about social media .

I must agree with your thoughts about Tom Conroy. He was one of the best defensive full backs I have ever seen. A fearsome tackler and always sound under the high ball. Unfortunately he couldn't kick goals which seemed to be a requirement of a successful fullback in those days.

Despite the selectors favouring others I always felt Parry Gordon was unlucky not to be capped (although I seem to recall he got selected against PNG but it didn't count), also an absolute gent on and off the field. Perhaps it was the fact that he wasn't "chippy" enough that stood against him?