Who's taking the QB reps in practice

[frdbtr]

Also, do we really want to spend nearly 2 weeks preparing lark in order to bench him and play Riley? I just hope Bronco does what is right even though Riley will want to start. Lark is our best chance to win.

If Riley were going to be healthy enough to start on the 20th, he would already be healthy enough to practice. IMO it is that simple.

I'd love to think this was the case but "we've" already shown what we like to do when we prepare Lark for 1-2 weeks. We play Riley if he says he can play that day. I don't have any confidence that Lark starts unless Riley absolutely can't play.

I agree with the sentiment that many are sharing that this isn't Riley's fault and the blame is on the coaches but only to some degree. It's not Riley's fault that the coaches went with him but when he's at 60% and still begging to stay in the game so he can turn it over again, instead of letting his "friend" who has shown he's capable to play, there's some blame on Riley.

I don't blame competitors who want to play. I blame coaches who don't bench guys who are physically incapable of playing.

[snoscythe]

And this is when we suddenly remember jacksonman's five-year long obsession with Lark...

[Cougarfan87]

Also, do we really want to spend nearly 2 weeks preparing lark in order to bench him and play Riley? I just hope Bronco does what is right even though Riley will want to start. Lark is our best chance to win.

If Riley were going to be healthy enough to start on the 20th, he would already be healthy enough to practice. IMO it is that simple.

I'd love to think this was the case but "we've" already shown what we like to do when we prepare Lark for 1-2 weeks. We play Riley if he says he can play that day. I don't have any confidence that Lark starts unless Riley absolutely can't play.

I agree with the sentiment that many are sharing that this isn't Riley's fault and the blame is on the coaches but only to some degree. It's not Riley's fault that the coaches went with him but when he's at 60% and still begging to stay in the game so he can turn it over again, instead of letting his "friend" who has shown he's capable to play, there's some blame on Riley.

I agree with this. Even though Ben Roethlisberger may have a lot of character attributes we do not like, when he was injured he said he could have played but didn't because he felt he was not currently the team's best chance of winning. That is called putting the team first.

Now, maybe Riley really thought he was the best chance of winning rather than just being selfish, but that is more an issue with lack of self awareness than selfishness. Considering his age, I would say he lacks self awareness, not that he was selfish. It was the coach's responsiblity to have the awareness to determine the most appropriate starter. Let's hope they get it right with the bowl game.

[Stirfry]

Also, do we really want to spend nearly 2 weeks preparing lark in order to bench him and play Riley? I just hope Bronco does what is right even though Riley will want to start. Lark is our best chance to win.

If Riley were going to be healthy enough to start on the 20th, he would already be healthy enough to practice. IMO it is that simple.

I'd love to think this was the case but "we've" already shown what we like to do when we prepare Lark for 1-2 weeks. We play Riley if he says he can play that day. I don't have any confidence that Lark starts unless Riley absolutely can't play.

I agree with the sentiment that many are sharing that this isn't Riley's fault and the blame is on the coaches but only to some degree. It's not Riley's fault that the coaches went with him but when he's at 60% and still begging to stay in the game so he can turn it over again, instead of letting his "friend" who has shown he's capable to play, there's some blame on Riley.

I don't blame competitors who want to play. I blame coaches who don't bench guys who are physically incapable of playing.

Maybe we should lobby Bronco to change the name of the "Leadership" council to the "Competitor" council for next year and it would clear everything up.

[frdbtr]

Also, do we really want to spend nearly 2 weeks preparing lark in order to bench him and play Riley? I just hope Bronco does what is right even though Riley will want to start. Lark is our best chance to win.

If Riley were going to be healthy enough to start on the 20th, he would already be healthy enough to practice. IMO it is that simple.

I'd love to think this was the case but "we've" already shown what we like to do when we prepare Lark for 1-2 weeks. We play Riley if he says he can play that day. I don't have any confidence that Lark starts unless Riley absolutely can't play.

I agree with the sentiment that many are sharing that this isn't Riley's fault and the blame is on the coaches but only to some degree. It's not Riley's fault that the coaches went with him but when he's at 60% and still begging to stay in the game so he can turn it over again, instead of letting his "friend" who has shown he's capable to play, there's some blame on Riley.

I agree with this. Even though Ben Roethlisberger may have a lot of character attributes we do not like, when he was injured he said he could have played but didn't because he felt he was not currently the team's best chance of winning. That is called putting the team first.

Now, maybe Riley really thought he was the best chance of winning rather than just being selfish, but that is more an issue with lack of self awareness than selfishness. Considering his age, I would say he lacks self awareness, not that he was selfish. It was the coach's responsiblity to have the awareness to determine the most appropriate starter. Let's hope they get it right with the bowl game.

The mindset in the NFL is totally different than college. Rothlesberger would have played through anything in college because he was trying to make the NFL. In the NFL your body is your living so you protect it. If your body is broke, you don't get a paycheck/contract.

[SpiffCoug]

And this is when we suddenly remember jacksonman's five-year long obsession with Lark...

I thought that fifthqb?

[Cougarfan87]

I agree with this. Even though Ben Roethlisberger may have a lot of character attributes we do not like, when he was injured he said he could have played but didn't because he felt he was not currently the team's best chance of winning. That is called putting the team first.

Now, maybe Riley really thought he was the best chance of winning rather than just being selfish, but that is more an issue with lack of self awareness than selfishness. Considering his age, I would say he lacks self awareness, not that he was selfish. It was the coach's responsiblity to have the awareness to determine the most appropriate starter. Let's hope they get it right with the bowl game.

The mindset in the NFL is totally different than college. Rothlesberger would have played through anything in college because he was trying to make the NFL. In the NFL your body is your living so you protect it. If your body is broke, you don't get a paycheck/contract.

I don't doubt that self preservation has something to do with it, but Roethlisberger has often played injured. Furthermore, he wants to win every game he can because there is a financial incentive for making the playoffs. I believe it is a sign of maturity to know you are not always the best option for winning.

He could have just said, "I am not healthy enough to compete." Instead he said, "I probably could play, but I didn't want to hurt the team." Why would he say that if he were just protecting his body when he could have just said that he wasn't fully healed yet? I think he was trying to demonstrate that there are times when even if you are healed enough to technically play, you don't represent the best option for your team because you are not at 100%. Whether or not that was just his excuse to protect himself, I do not know. Base on his previous history of playing hurt, I don't think so. But it was a refreshing perspective to hear from athletes that are considered supremely egotistical.

[BroncoBot]

And this is when we suddenly remember jacksonman's five-year long obsession with Lark...

I thought that fifthqb?

I think you're right Spiff, unless jacksonman also was obsessed.
fifthqb has been calling for Lark since day uno.

[fifthqb]

And this is when we suddenly remember jacksonman's five-year long obsession with Lark...

I thought that fifthqb?

I think you're right Spiff, unless jacksonman also was obsessed.
fifthqb has been calling for Lark since day uno.

It's going to be difficult finding a new calling card here in a few days when Lark is gone...

[Cougarbib]

And this is when we suddenly remember jacksonman's five-year long obsession with Lark...

I thought that fifthqb?

I think you're right Spiff, unless jacksonman also was obsessed.
fifthqb has been calling for Lark since day uno.

It's going to be difficult finding a new calling card here in a few days when Lark is gone...

Will Lark try to get on with a CFL or Arena Football team? It would be nice to see him get some sort of break.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]