La Monica, MB, Fukuda, DH, Miramonti, AA, Beyer, KS, Hoffman, MW, Boone, CH, Tanigawa, S, Wang, R, Church, DD, Stout, JR, and Hoffman, JR. Physical differences between forwards and backs in American collegiate rugby players. J Strength Cond Res 30(9): 2382-2391, 2016This study examined the anthropometric and physical performance differences between forwards and backs in a championship-level American male collegiate rugby team. Twenty-five male rugby athletes (mean +/- SD; age 20.2 +/- 1.6 years) were assessed. Athletes were grouped according to position as forwards (n = 13) and backs (n = 12) and were evaluated on the basis of anthropometrics (height, weight, percent body fat [BF%]), cross-sectional area (CSA), muscle thickness (MT), and pennation angle (PA) of the vastus lateralis (VL), maximal strength (1 repetition maximum [1RM] bench press and squat), vertical jump power, midthigh pull (peak force [PF] and peak rate of force development [PRFD]), maximal aerobic capacity (V.o(2)peak), agility (pro agility, T test), speed (40-m sprint), and a tethered sprint (peak velocity [PV], time to peak velocity, distance covered, and step rate and length). Comparisons between forwards and backs were analyzed using independent t-tests with Cohen's d effect size. Forwards were significantly different from backs for body weight (90.5 +/- 12.4 vs. 73.7 +/- 7.1 kg, p < 0.01; d = 1.60), BF% (12.6 +/- 4.2 vs. 8.8 +/- 2.1%, p 0.05; d = 1.10), VL CSA (38.3 +/- 9.1 vs. 28.7 +/- 4.7 cm(3), p < 0.01; d = 1.26), 1RM bench press (121.1 +/- 30.3 vs. 89.5 +/- 20.4 kg, p 0.05; d = 1.17), 1RM squat (164.6 +/- 43.0 vs. 108.5 +/- 31.5 kg, p < 0.01; d = 1.42), PF (2,244.6 +/- 505.2 vs. 1,654.6 +/- 338.8 N, p < 0.01; d = 1.32), PV (5.49 +/- 0.25 vs. 5.14 +/- 0.37 ms(-1), p 0.05; d = 1.04), and step length (1.2 +/- 0.1 vs. 1.1 +/- 0.1 m, p 0.05; d = 0.80). V.o(2)peak was significantly (p 0.05, d = -1.20) higher in backs (54.9 +/- 3.9 mlkgmin(-1)) than in forwards (49.4 +/- 4.4 mlkgmin(-1)). No differences in agility performance were found between position groups. The results of this study provide descriptive information on anthropometric and performance measures on American male collegiate championship-level rugby players offering potential standards for coaches to use when developing or recruiting players.