- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,335
The great players would be great players in any era.
Comparing sizes is a bit moot because humans are getting bigger and more athletic. Nutrition is much better now than it was decades back and with the monetary rewards on offer youngsters are training much more professionally from a younger age. And once they get into the professional ranks they become full time athletes.
Doing the opposite of the OP, if you put Lance Franklin exactly as he is now on the field 50 years ago he'd probably be the best player of all time. But that's unrealistic. There were not many player's his height playing in those days and those that were certainly didn't have anywhere near the speed or aerobic capacity that Buddy does. If Buddy played in the 1960's he'd likely be a couple inches shorter, about 10kg's less and would barely leave the forward 50 because he wouldn't have the training that gives him the capacity to run like he does in the modern game. In any era he'd be regarded as one of the great key position forwards.
The overall talent of the playing pool, and those at the top, largely stays roughly the same. The training, coaching, professionalism, nutrition and tactics all improve over time and our game has been one that has changed considerably over the last 20 to 30 years. Of the sports I follow probably only rugby union has changed more.
Comparing sizes is a bit moot because humans are getting bigger and more athletic. Nutrition is much better now than it was decades back and with the monetary rewards on offer youngsters are training much more professionally from a younger age. And once they get into the professional ranks they become full time athletes.
Doing the opposite of the OP, if you put Lance Franklin exactly as he is now on the field 50 years ago he'd probably be the best player of all time. But that's unrealistic. There were not many player's his height playing in those days and those that were certainly didn't have anywhere near the speed or aerobic capacity that Buddy does. If Buddy played in the 1960's he'd likely be a couple inches shorter, about 10kg's less and would barely leave the forward 50 because he wouldn't have the training that gives him the capacity to run like he does in the modern game. In any era he'd be regarded as one of the great key position forwards.
The overall talent of the playing pool, and those at the top, largely stays roughly the same. The training, coaching, professionalism, nutrition and tactics all improve over time and our game has been one that has changed considerably over the last 20 to 30 years. Of the sports I follow probably only rugby union has changed more.