Food for Thought

I don't get the calls for Lark. Did Riley make some bad decisions Friday? Yes. Did he cost us the game? He certainly contributed. Was his PER below average? Yes.



But before you throw Riley to the wayside after one poor game, consider this:



Since taking over for Jake Heaps...Nelson has thrown for over 1,000 yards and 12 touchdowns with an efficiency rating well above 160. Before Friday, he'd thrown for at least three scores in three consecutive starts.



http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Riley-Nelson-celebrates-with-a-referee-after-a-B?urn=ncaaf-wp8927" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Gunk wrote:
I don't get the calls for Lark. Did Riley make some bad decisions Friday? Yes. Did he cost us the game? He certainly contributed. Was his PER below average? Yes.



But before you throw Riley to the wayside after one poor game, consider this:



Since taking over for Jake Heaps...Nelson has thrown for over 1,000 yards and 12 touchdowns with an efficiency rating well above 160. Before Friday, he'd thrown for at least three scores in three consecutive starts.



http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Riley-Nelson-celebrates-with-a-referee-after-a-B?urn=ncaaf-wp8927" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I could have thrown for 1,000 yds against that competition too, I'm not impressed. I'm willing to give Riley some more time to develop since he showed great improvement over last year, but I think we need to be giving Lark or Heaps some time in these next few games to develop as well. We will be needing another QB sometime this year or next and if Riley plateaus where he is right now, then we are out of luck with no QB ready to play. I guess that's why people want to see Lark?



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I think most people just want Lark to get some backup time. I want him to start.



Anyways, I like Riley. I think he has done a great job bringing this team a spark. It's what we needed. He's an upgrade from Jake, but I think the sense that Riley has a low ceiling is why people are interested in seeing what the other guys can do.



I consider Riley the weak link of the offense (not counting Doman, he's not going anywhere). When opposing teams are trying to force your Quarterback to throw the football against them, its a problem. If Riley is are starter heading into next year I am going to have a really hard time getting excited. Is Riley good enough to beat most the teams we play? Absolutely. Is Riley good enough to help this team go to the next level? I don't think so.



That's why I'm interested in seeing what the others can do. It's a bye week this week and I hope the coaching staff makes the right decisions to help us out for next year. We have three very easy games left and then a mediocre bowl game. I hope we can focus on developing the players that are going to lead us next year.

Gunk wrote:
I don't get the calls for Lark. Did Riley make some bad decisions Friday? Yes. Did he cost us the game? He certainly contributed. Was his PER below average? Yes.



But before you throw Riley to the wayside after one poor game, consider this:



Since taking over for Jake Heaps...Nelson has thrown for over 1,000 yards and 12 touchdowns with an efficiency rating well above 160. Before Friday, he'd thrown for at least three scores in three consecutive starts.



http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Riley-Nelson-celebrates-with-a-referee-after-a-B?urn=ncaaf-wp8927" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Next week, Nelson will break Doman's career rushing mark, leaving only Virgil Carter and Steve Young to surpass. If he stays healthy, he may pass all of them this season - or very early next season. Have some fun and enjoy it.



Someone called for a NFL caliber JC recruit. Lots of those around - not. Fewer - LDS - or HC compatible. And Utah is first in line for any JC QB with that kind of upside with a certain starting job. Sark came to us that way. First year was no better than Nelson is this year imho.



See my If - I were KIng post - for my call to see Lark. I would like to see a little Lark next week.

fifthqb wrote:
I think most people just want Lark to get some backup time. I want him to start.



Anyways, I like Riley. I think he has done a great job bringing this team a spark. It's what we needed. He's an upgrade from Jake, but I think the sense that Riley has a low ceiling is why people are interested in seeing what the other guys can do.



I consider Riley the weak link of the offense (not counting Doman, he's not going anywhere). When opposing teams are trying to force your Quarterback to throw the football against them, its a problem. If Riley is are starter heading into next year I am going to have a really hard time getting excited. Is Riley good enough to beat most the teams we play? Absolutely. Is Riley good enough to help this team go to the next level? I don't think so.



That's why I'm interested in seeing what the others can do. It's a bye week this week and I hope the coaching staff makes the right decisions to help us out for next year. We have three very easy games left and then a mediocre bowl game. I hope we can focus on developing the players that are going to lead us next year.

That would be a weird change. The only players this coaching staff seem like they have any interest in developing are walk-ons and players that are trying really hard.

fifthqb wrote:
I think most people just want Lark to get some backup time. I want him to start.



Anyways, I like Riley. I think he has done a great job bringing this team a spark. It's what we needed. He's an upgrade from Jake, but I think the sense that Riley has a low ceiling is why people are interested in seeing what the other guys can do.



I consider Riley the weak link of the offense (not counting Doman, he's not going anywhere). When opposing teams are trying to force your Quarterback to throw the football against them, its a problem. If Riley is are starter heading into next year I am going to have a really hard time getting excited. Is Riley good enough to beat most the teams we play? Absolutely. Is Riley good enough to help this team go to the next level? I don't think so.



That's why I'm interested in seeing what the others can do. It's a bye week this week and I hope the coaching staff makes the right decisions to help us out for next year. We have three very easy games left and then a mediocre bowl game. I hope we can focus on developing the players that are going to lead us next year.

We could be playing an undefeated Houston team or an SMU team that beat TCU in that mediocre Bowl Game. Do your homework - otherwise you come across as pouting and spouting.

stuckinbig10country wrote:

I think most people just want Lark to get some backup time. I want him to start.



Anyways, I like Riley. I think he has done a great job bringing this team a spark. It's what we needed. He's an upgrade from Jake, but I think the sense that Riley has a low ceiling is why people are interested in seeing what the other guys can do.



I consider Riley the weak link of the offense (not counting Doman, he's not going anywhere). When opposing teams are trying to force your Quarterback to throw the football against them, its a problem. If Riley is are starter heading into next year I am going to have a really hard time getting excited. Is Riley good enough to beat most the teams we play? Absolutely. Is Riley good enough to help this team go to the next level? I don't think so.



That's why I'm interested in seeing what the others can do. It's a bye week this week and I hope the coaching staff makes the right decisions to help us out for next year. We have three very easy games left and then a mediocre bowl game. I hope we can focus on developing the players that are going to lead us next year.

That would be a weird change. The only players this coaching staff seem like they have any interest in developing are walk-ons and players that are trying really hard.

Asinine comment imho. Who would you rather have fielded that punt returned to the house vs TCU. Falslev is still a walk-on. Probably deserves a schollie. Maybe when Apo toughens up a bit - he can give it a go.



Just who on that bench - at any position - do you think is better than who they are sitting behind. Specific names to replace and to be replaced by. Put up - or shut up.

fifthqb wrote:
I think most people just want Lark to get some backup time. I want him to start.

Thank goodness you have NO say....



Anyone who thinks Lark would do better than nelson or heaps is... naive at best...

BYULV wrote:

I don't get the calls for Lark. Did Riley make some bad decisions Friday? Yes. Did he cost us the game? He certainly contributed. Was his PER below average? Yes.



But before you throw Riley to the wayside after one poor game, consider this:



Since taking over for Jake Heaps...Nelson has thrown for over 1,000 yards and 12 touchdowns with an efficiency rating well above 160. Before Friday, he'd thrown for at least three scores in three consecutive starts.



http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Riley-Nelson-celebrates-with-a-referee-after-a-B?urn=ncaaf-wp8927" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I could have thrown for 1,000 yds against that competition too,

:roll: This kind of tired rhetoric is the problem. If our current backup couldn't get it done vs. this competition (and he's shown that he can't), YOU couldn't either. A 160 passer rating is not just getting by, it's not just serviceable, it's excellent. Yes, he's eating that competition alive, but he's doing it VERY WELL, which is what good QB's do vs bad opponents. Take out one or two poor decisions (forget that he played the whole rest of the game well, moving the offense down the field with frequency and efficiency) and Riley wins the TCU game for us. He didn't show that he's a bad QB, he showed just the opposite, that he can play and beat good opponents.

shakavaka wrote:

I think most people just want Lark to get some backup time. I want him to start.

Thank goodness you have NO say....



Anyone who thinks Lark would do better than nelson or heaps is... naive at best...

In the interest of full disclosure, fifthqb has been calling for Lark to start for two years now. It's not like the TCU game made him see a light or anything. It just gave him an opening to shill for his guy.

BYULV wrote:

I could have thrown for 1,000 yds against that competition too,

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

bs

Cougarbib2 wrote:

We could be playing an undefeated Houston team or an SMU team that beat TCU in that mediocre Bowl Game. Do your homework - otherwise you come across as pouting and spouting.

Wow. Thanks for the homework lesson teacher. How about you do the rest of my homework for me and tell me how excited I should be to play a CUSA team? How about how big the bowl is? What's our payout? How much of the BYU fan base are amped to play this game? I'm sure when you answer all of those questions I will realize that the Armed forces bowl is a great bowl game, nigh BCS!

snoscythe wrote:

In the interest of full disclosure, fifthqb has been calling for Lark to start for two years now. It's not like the TCU game made him see a light or anything. It just gave him an opening to shill for his guy.

1. Thanks for the disclosure sno. I have tried to make that as clear as possible when I said "I want Lark to start". I've been supporting Riley at the games every week, but like I said I do not think he is good enough to take us to the next level. He is good enough however for a mediocre team. He will help us beat the bad teams and it seems that's where most people are satisfied. If my only other option (which I believe it to be) is Heaps, than I want Nelson to play out the rest of his career.

shakavaka wrote:





Thank goodness you have NO say....



Anyone who thinks Lark would do better than nelson or heaps is... naive at best...

Naive at best? Reasoning being? We have had this conversation before, which I can quickly ask "What makes you think Lark would do worse" and then you would say "What makes you think Lark would do good at all he obviously he hasn't shown anything in practice", Then I would counter with not getting a chance a in practice and so forth. We could go on forever. But since I'm obviously naive I won't drag you down into an argument with me. You continue to be satisfied with mediocrity, and I will keep wanting my friend to get a chance to show what he is capable of. We will both lose.

Lark could likely be our backup next year. It would be wise for coaches to get him some live game looks. With Idaho (1-7) and New Mexico St (3-5) coming up, we have a chance to get both Heaps and Lark reps.

rblack wrote:

I could have thrown for 1,000 yds against that competition too,

I couldn't have. I tried last night in a pick up game in the backyard with my kids and threw four picks against a 45 yr old db. I only had one TD and maybe 5 completions for about 1 length of the backyard. I wish I was more like you BYULV. You da man. ;)



GO Cougs!!!

J. Child

Ammon, ID



ps. If you ever want to talk soccer on the strength of my 38 yr old legs then maybe we can talk about something I can do better than Riley!

fifthqb wrote:

We could be playing an undefeated Houston team or an SMU team that beat TCU in that mediocre Bowl Game. Do your homework - otherwise you come across as pouting and spouting.

Wow. Thanks for the homework lesson teacher. How about you do the rest of my homework for me and tell me how excited I should be to play a CUSA team? How about how big the bowl is? What's our payout? How much of the BYU fan base are amped to play this game? I'm sure when you answer all of those questions I will realize that the Armed forces bowl is a great bowl game, nigh BCS!

snoscythe wrote:

In the interest of full disclosure, fifthqb has been calling for Lark to start for two years now. It's not like the TCU game made him see a light or anything. It just gave him an opening to shill for his guy.

1. Thanks for the disclosure sno. I have tried to make that as clear as possible when I said "I want Lark to start". I've been supporting Riley at the games every week, but like I said I do not think he is good enough to take us to the next level. He is good enough however for a mediocre team. He will help us beat the bad teams and it seems that's where most people are satisfied. If my only other option (which I believe it to be) is Heaps, than I want Nelson to play out the rest of his career.

shakavaka wrote:





Thank goodness you have NO say....



Anyone who thinks Lark would do better than nelson or heaps is... naive at best...

Naive at best? Reasoning being? We have had this conversation before, which I can quickly ask "What makes you think Lark would do worse" and then you would say "What makes you think Lark would do good at all he obviously he hasn't shown anything in practice", Then I would counter with not getting a chance a in practice and so forth. We could go on forever. But since I'm obviously naive I won't drag you down into an argument with me. You continue to be satisfied with mediocrity, and I will keep wanting my friend to get a chance to show what he is capable of. We will both lose.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">



If I understand what you are trying to say, you are trying to point out that you have a really hard time being objective about Lark Vs anyone, and thus you get frustrated and pout and spout all kinds of other nonsense - kind of like my wife does when I watch too much BYU football instead of spending my time the way she thinks I should spend it. Probably best to recognize your bias and accompanying emotions and not venture so far out on the proverbial limb.



Having said that, I have felt since early 2010 that Bronc needs to get Lark some reps to develop him and so he and we can see what Lark has got.

Fifthqb, Lark hasn't played a single down of D1 football and gets at most 10% of the reps in practice and you seriously think he'll do better?



Secondly, we are at least 3 years away before BYU is playing any sort of national level, but given our track record odds are it won't be for a decade. If BYU couldn't put it together with Hall the rest of the NFL talent around what on earth makes you think it'll happen within the next two years under Lark.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib2 wrote:

If I understand what you are trying to say, you are trying to point out that you have a really hard time being objective about Lark Vs anyone, and thus you get frustrated and pout and spout all kinds of other nonsense - kind of like my wife does when I watch too much BYU football instead of spending my time the way she thinks I should spend it. Probably best to recognize your bias and accompanying emotions and not venture so far out on the proverbial limb.



Having said that, I have felt since early 2010 that Bronc needs to get Lark some reps to develop him and so he and we can see what Lark has got.

It takes a big man to belittle his wife to make a point on an message board. A tip of the hat to you sir. What proverbial limb am I out on here bib? By saying that the Armed Forces bowl is mediocre? Perhaps you have done my homework for me and can now tell me why that bowl game is anything but average? You failed to respond in your last message. Or maybe you are just scared to join me on the proverbial limb as you are apparently the "proverbial King".



I am fully capable of separating my frustration over the QB situation from my frustration with the bowl arrangement and coaching. My position remains the same regarding my belief that Riley is not good enough to lead us past a good opponent.

Gunk wrote:
Fifthqb, Lark hasn't played a single down of D1 football and gets at most 10% of the reps in practice and you seriously think he'll do better?

I believe that he would do worse. Riley was responsible for an inexcusable amount of turnovers yesterday. We have already had the conversation about there being a number of people that have come out of no where to perform exceptionally. Maybe Lark will be that guy. Our Kurt Warner. Likely not, but the point of my argument isn't that Lark will be incredible, but that the players we do know something about are not good enough to take us where this program needs to go. I suppose I am more aggressive in my football philosophy than most on this board. I think its a good idea to roll the dice on Lark for a game to see what you get.

Gunk wrote:

Secondly, we are at least 3 years away before BYU is playing any sort of national level, but given our track record odds are it won't be for a decade. If BYU couldn't put it together with Hall the rest of the NFL talent around what on earth makes you think it'll happen within the next two years under Lark.

Do I need to explain the problem logically in using this point in this argument? If you already consider these next three years a forgone loss than why would you not be in support of rolling the dice with another player? In other words, if all is lost with Heaps and Nelson for you already then you should not care if we give Lark a look.

Fifth



The Bowl Game is about the opponents and hopefully how well they match up to create an interesting and competitive game. You act like BYU is going to be playing a broken down UTEP team again. I am pointing out that we are probably going to get tested - and maybe more than TCU tested us.



What do you want - a blowout loss Vs a team way far better than Utah, Texas, or TCU in a BCS Bowl?



Houston may be better than any of those and SMU may be close. We will have to wait and see if we improve and they suffer a key injury.



We will have all we can handle in our bowl game and way more than Lark has been prepared to handle. That is why I would like to see a little Lark each of the next three games - hopefully a lot

of Lark. Been suggesting that since last year.



Wasn't belittling my wife. Lots of people on here can relate to that comment if their wife is not a fan. They better spend some quality time earning quality BYU FB time. But the EMO is not a very manly attribute - should have referenced the light beer commercial. TIC. Can't get to the wink icon with my iPad.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Fair enough. The opponent should make for a good match up so I will concede that point. As to the wife comment, my fiance is the type that wants to get to the games 2 hours early and demands we watch all the games on tv. =) Here's hoping that lasts into marriage.

Idaho is awful. If it's another 56-3 game, there is no reason Heaps should get every garbage time series. Lark has been in the program long enough that he should be rewarded with some playing time in actual games.