James Lark bumped down to #3

Lark has been replaced by Taysom Hill in the backup qb spot.



Good move for the cougars to start getting Hill ready for starting next year. Tough news for a great guy in James Lark who has done everything asked of him and done so much more for the team.

I agree, good move for the cougars, especially as it relates to next year. Very sad for a loyal player that did everything asked of him.

As much as it's "The best thing for the program" screwing Lark over and over has never worked out for BYU. I'm very saddened by this move. I really hope Karma doesn't bite us in butt again.



I'm a friend of the Lark family and it's particularly disappointing for me. As much as I love BYU's program and spirit, there are harsh realities of sports. Lark is the sacrificial lamb of the program.

We need Lark to be put in. Time to let our other Senior shine. Riley HAD his chance, twice and this experiment is not working!

fifthqb wrote:

I'm a friend of the Lark family...

:bug: This comes as shocking news to the CC community.

Totally disagree with this move. Lark should have taken over for Riley. Hill looks totally lost when he has to pass



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

Lark is a senior who KNOWS the play book. Just a better QB. Then bring in Hill for designed plays.



Our coaching staff sucks!!

I gotta say, I feel really bad for the guy, but keep in mind that it's still early in the year. After both Riley AND Hill have broken backs from designed QB draws, Lark could still get his chance.

tmoney35 wrote:
I gotta say, I feel really bad for the guy, but keep in mind that it's still early in the year. After both Riley AND Hill have broken backs from designed QB draws, Lark could still get his chance.

This. Or if Hill struggles too much - Lark. I would like to have seen what Lark could do. He should have gotten a look see in 2010 as I took heat for suggesting back then.



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

It is a shame that Lark has not been able to emerge as a solid option with all the instability at QB over the last 2 years. Halfway through your senior year is a bit too late to get your first looks.

Fido wrote:
It is a shame that Lark has not been able to emerge as a solid option with all the instability at QB over the last 2 years. Halfway through your senior year is a bit too late to get your first looks.

Exactly. It is too late for him now, have to look to the future. We blew it in 2010 and 2011, and maybe even in 2009.



Let's hope in 2013 that Hill is the clear starter, and that we also have an able back-up. History shows that with our running QB style, it will be needed.

This is a mistake. Lark should be starting.

jonnylingo wrote:
This is a mistake. Lark should be starting.

That's where I am. Hill should be in at halftime. You're going to want Lark for Utah State, Notre Dame, and Georgia Tech, too. After we get through that gauntlet, Hill should play the second half of every remaining game.



We have forgotten the recent past if we think it is better to start a freshman. I think there is a place for Hill in every game, but it should be in blowouts and sure wins after Lark has already taken the pressure off by getting some scores on the board.



If Riley is healthy, it should be Riley, and then Hill in mop up duty. But for now, Lark should get a chance to be the man.



Only bad things can happen by throwing Hill to the wolves. What if he gets injured? Riley got injured playing Weber State, so the quality of opponent doesn't matter when it comes to injury. There needs to be a change in playcalling philosophy (not putting your QB at so much risk) and in personnel philosophy for a freshman QB--put him in situations where he can only succeed or at least not screw it up for the team.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

This is a mistake. Lark should be starting.

That's where I am. Hill should be in at halftime. You're going to want Lark for Utah State, Notre Dame, and Georgia Tech, too. After we get through that gauntlet, Hill should play the second half of every remaining game.



We have forgotten the recent past if we think it is better to start a freshman. I think there is a place for Hill in every game, but it should be in blowouts and sure wins after Lark has already taken the pressure off by getting some scores on the board.



If Riley is healthy, it should be Riley, and then Hill in mop up duty. But for now, Lark should get a chance to be the man.



Only bad things can happen by throwing Hill to the wolves. What if he gets injured? Riley got injured playing Weber State, so the quality of opponent doesn't matter when it comes to injury. There needs to be a change in playcalling philosophy (not putting your QB at so much risk) and in personnel philosophy for a freshman QB--put him in situations where he can only succeed or at least not screw it up for the team.

I agree with this. ease hill in. allow lark with the experience to get a chance. if he can't do it well go with hill. hill's responsibilities should slowly expand until after gt where he should get the second half the rest of the way.

You guys are going to be proven wrong. Hill has not had enough reps for you to be badmouthing him already. Nothing against Lark just be prepared if all of you have to eat your words. Unless you have seen both of them at each practice and scrimmage none of you know what you are talking about. Hill is an elite athlete who would have been the heir apperent for Andrew Luck if Harbaugh had not went to SF two years ago. He throws two balls low but catchable and you have a hissey fit. Kellan Moore was three years younger than Taysom when he tore em up his freshman season. He starts two drives at the one and another at the five and you automatically assume he cannot pass.

tjerbear wrote:
You guys are going to be proven wrong. Hill has not had enough reps for you to be badmouthing him already. Nothing against Lark just be prepared if all of you have to eat your words. Unless you have seen both of them at each practice and scrimmage none of you know what you are talking about. Hill is an elite athlete who would have been the heir apperent for Andrew Luck if Harbaugh had not went to SF two years ago. He throws two balls low but catchable and you have a hissey fit. Kellan Moore was three years younger than Taysom when he tore em up his freshman season. He starts two drives at the one and another at the five and you automatically assume he cannot pass.

does anybody recall anybody badmouthing hill? I sure don't.