Brock Purdy Gives Me Some Insight Into The Skepticism About Tua | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Brock Purdy Gives Me Some Insight Into The Skepticism About Tua

Don't know about right or wrong on this but between the OP and Ejay, there's enough text there for several sleeplessness nights 😂
 
ThePeopleShow13 said:
The main difference being Brady was the best player on the Patriots team for close to 2 decades. He won SBs his team had no business even being in from a talent perspective. The 49ers have arguably the best roster in the NFL if you ignore the QB position. CMC, Trent Williams, Nick Bosa and Fred Warner are the top 1-2 players in the NFL at their position. Not to mention they have Aiyuk, Kittle and Samuel on offense and an excellent OL.
Click to expand...
Revisionist history and completely besides the fact that sometimes they get it wrong in the draft, which was the point.
 
'Deep said:
I just think both QBs flourish from having Shanahan and McDaniel. Mike was a quick study and he’s taken things up a notch. Never seen the stuff he’s doing with an offense like what he’s scheming up with ours. Granted, we’ve got the guys to do it.
Click to expand...
Yes the are in great systems but so were Jacoby Brissett, Teddy Bridgewater, and Trey Lance....
 
phinsforlife said:
Purdy is in the similar no respect bucket as Tua. Both get the knock of being system QBs that are only successful due to the talent and great coaching around them. Ask most pundits, neither Tua nor Purdy is in their top 5, or even top 10. I think it is a combination of their smaller size, lack of running ability, lack of cannons for arms, and the fact that they don't make highlight film type plays, which aids and abets the skepticism. Purdy is also hurt by his low draft status and the fact that he was not a big name coming out of college.

While I defend Tua and state his unique strengths are not recognized or understood and he is the point guard that makes it all happen, I cannot bring myself to say Purdy is a top 5 QB. That is especially odd, because Purdy has been better than Tua this year. #1 rated QB in the NFL, only 1 fewer TD pass, 4 fewer INTs, and has delivered wins against top flight teams with good defenses like Philly and Dallas.

I wouldn't be surprised if many on Finheaven have the same perspective as me. Tua is great, and Purdy is just a guy. If you think that way, and ding Purdy, perhaps we are all making the mistake about Purdy that the pundits make about Tua. Which if nothing else, helps you understand the skepticism.

I remember last year when the Dolphins played the 49ers. Garropolo got hurt, and Purdy came in. He started the year as the third string QB, that means he had no reps. After being forced into action, with zero experience, he tore the Dolphins to shreds. That should have been the early indicator the kid might have it. In no time, he looked a fair bit better than Garropolo ever did, who had a lot of experience, was in the same system with the same players and coaches, and was viewed as a borderline top 10 NFL QB, that had taken his team to the SB.

The great QBs make it look easy. There is more to being a great QB and winning games that having a cannon for an arm or being able to run around all over the place. It is still a decision making position. When you watch Brady or Tua or Purdy play, players look wide open all of the time. Perhaps that is not a function of the talent around them and the system, but of what the QB is doing. Making the right reads, getting the ball out quickly, throwing accurately and with anticipation, and getting it to the right receiver that is the open guy.

Great QBs also have leadership characteristics. It is clear Tua is liked and respected by his teammates. Tom Brady was able to drive discipline into both teams he played for.

Watch tape of bad QBs. There are players open all of the time, but the bad QBs tend not to throw the ball to the right receiver or the right spot on the field, or throw it late and not accurately without anticipation. The great QBs do. Perhaps this is why guys like Tua and Purdy get no respect, because they make it look too easy, so the punditude just assumes it is because of what is around them. But if that was the case, Garropolo would have looked as good as Purdy, and Bridgewater as good as Tua. Neither was even close.

Long winded, but if you are like me and have been skeptical about Purdy, that should give you insight into why many of the national pundits are skeptical about both. And likely very wrong about both.
Click to expand...
I should have said in my initial response, you are absolutely correct about the pundits. They are dopes. Sometimes too quick to dismiss and sometimes too quick to anoint. IMO, those that don't actually present film breakdowns are usually wrong.
 
They’re definitely viewed similarly, and to be honest, that’s okay with me. I watched Purdy for about his first 10 plays last year and went, “Ah, ****, Miami’s in trouble.”
 
phinsforlife said:
Purdy is in the similar no respect bucket as Tua. Both get the knock of being system QBs that are only successful due to the talent and great coaching around them. Ask most pundits, neither Tua nor Purdy is in their top 5, or even top 10. I think it is a combination of their smaller size, lack of running ability, lack of cannons for arms, and the fact that they don't make highlight film type plays, which aids and abets the skepticism. Purdy is also hurt by his low draft status and the fact that he was not a big name coming out of college.

While I defend Tua and state his unique strengths are not recognized or understood and he is the point guard that makes it all happen, I cannot bring myself to say Purdy is a top 5 QB. That is especially odd, because Purdy has been better than Tua this year. #1 rated QB in the NFL, only 1 fewer TD pass, 4 fewer INTs, and has delivered wins against top flight teams with good defenses like Philly and Dallas.

I wouldn't be surprised if many on Finheaven have the same perspective as me. Tua is great, and Purdy is just a guy. If you think that way, and ding Purdy, perhaps we are all making the mistake about Purdy that the pundits make about Tua. Which if nothing else, helps you understand the skepticism.

I remember last year when the Dolphins played the 49ers. Garropolo got hurt, and Purdy came in. He started the year as the third string QB, that means he had no reps. After being forced into action, with zero experience, he tore the Dolphins to shreds. That should have been the early indicator the kid might have it. In no time, he looked a fair bit better than Garropolo ever did, who had a lot of experience, was in the same system with the same players and coaches, and was viewed as a borderline top 10 NFL QB, that had taken his team to the SB.

The great QBs make it look easy. There is more to being a great QB and winning games that having a cannon for an arm or being able to run around all over the place. It is still a decision making position. When you watch Brady or Tua or Purdy play, players look wide open all of the time. Perhaps that is not a function of the talent around them and the system, but of what the QB is doing. Making the right reads, getting the ball out quickly, throwing accurately and with anticipation, and getting it to the right receiver that is the open guy.

Great QBs also have leadership characteristics. It is clear Tua is liked and respected by his teammates. Tom Brady was able to drive discipline into both teams he played for.

Watch tape of bad QBs. There are players open all of the time, but the bad QBs tend not to throw the ball to the right receiver or the right spot on the field, or throw it late and not accurately without anticipation. The great QBs do. Perhaps this is why guys like Tua and Purdy get no respect, because they make it look too easy, so the punditude just assumes it is because of what is around them. But if that was the case, Garropolo would have looked as good as Purdy, and Bridgewater as good as Tua. Neither was even close.

Long winded, but if you are like me and have been skeptical about Purdy, that should give you insight into why many of the national pundits are skeptical about both. And likely very wrong about both.
Click to expand...

The eyes don't lie, this is why QBs like Mac Jones, and Zach Wilson after the last two years scream to me Mediocre, and Brock Purdy and Tua are telling me they are Franchise QBs that should be respected.

Tua had the misfortune to play for a HC for two years that did not believe in him, but even then, if you actually paid attention, Tua did show signs that he is a Franchise QB, as long as you have a HC that trust him.

Do you think Purdy would be this successful if he played for a HC that did not trust him, and limited him to make throws that would help him win games?

I don't trust where a player was taken in a draft, but how successful he is, and Tua/Purdy have been very successful. So like some have done with Tua, if you are not paying attention, and continue to not think Purdy is not the real deal, then that is on the individual, and that person is just making himself look very ignorant.
 
While I love and appreciate the ongoing debate around Tua and his skills, at the end of the day, who cares?
If I'm a coach, I'm designing a system that brings out the best in my players.
If I'm a GM, I'm trying to load my team with the best talent.
Why should a team have to justify a player's performance with the caveat, "Oh, he's got all these studs around him?" or, "Well, McD's system plays to Tua's strengths?"
Historically, teams win because they have tons of talent (70s Steelers) or a system that accentuates their players skill levels (49ers West Coast O)
I understand the desire to constantly defend our QB, but why? Let people run their stupid mouths. 9-3 and rolling is all the talk we need. It's like the player whose team is losing 3-24 who squawks after a big tackle. We all know the proper response to that is: "Scoreboard, buddy."
Same deal.
 
The Bopkin said:
While I love and appreciate the ongoing debate around Tua and his skills, at the end of the day, who cares?
If I'm a coach, I'm designing a system that brings out the best in my players.
If I'm a GM, I'm trying to load my team with the best talent.
Why should a team have to justify a player's performance with the caveat, "Oh, he's got all these studs around him?" or, "Well, McD's system plays to Tua's strengths?"
Historically, teams win because they have tons of talent (70s Steelers) or a system that accentuates their players skill levels (49ers West Coast O)
I understand the desire to constantly defend our QB, but why? Let people run their stupid mouths. 9-3 and rolling is all the talk we need. It's like the player whose team is losing 3-24 who squawks after a big tackle. We all know the proper response to that is: "Scoreboard, buddy."
Same deal.
Click to expand...
Just win, baby )
 
jimthefin said:
When the 49ers lost a couple of their stars for a few games Purdy looked ordinary.

Stick Mac Jones in his spot and SF is still winning the same way.

And put Purdy in NE and he is a bum.
Click to expand...
Great point! I mean just look at how Jimmy G played with the 49ers compared to how he looked when he played for the Raiders this year as good example of that. He might not have put up the same stats as Purdy is doing this year but he won games and got them to a Super Bowl. This season he was hot garbage and that led to him getting benched.
 
phinsforlife said:
I knew that one was coming, will probably get about 50 more of those. One thing is clear, many prefer soundbytes and snippets, even about not terribly meaningful issues, to a longer discussion about something. To each his own, there is clearly a market for both.
Click to expand...
Thank tic tok and all the other social media for that garbage
 
This narrative does annoy me. And one could argue that every QB is a "system" QB, good teams build around players strengths. Philly offense is built around hurts strengths, Ravens offense is built around Lamar Jackson strengths and even Chiefs offense with Andy Reid who has a amazing track record with QB friendly systems. You can insert Josh Allen into our offense and it wouldnt be as productive as it is with Tua because those arent Josh Allens strengths. Just like Tua wouldnt be as successful in Bills offense. Joe Montana was in a system that fit his strengths.

A Tua vs Brock super bowl would be Purdy cool but they both would still have doubters/haters. Although I would like to see the Lions make the superbowl with us, they have been through crap like we have over the last two decades.
 
FinfanInBuffalo said:
Revisionist history and completely besides the fact that sometimes they get it wrong in the draft, which was the point.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, trying to compare Tom Brady to any other player is simply a moot point. There will never been another player like him. Yes, a lot of teams missed by passing on Brady, but that was 24 years ago.

The amount of time, money and technology that goes into drafting guys now is exponentially different. Purdy went in the 7th round because he has below NFL average arm strength and dealt with some injuries.

Yes, he has played well within the 49ers system. The difference between our offense and theirs is that ours was designed specifically for Tua and theirs was designed for any high end game manager QB. Jimmy G has never been a quality starter, has never been able to stay healthy, and it was not a surprise Purdy got the starting nod before the season.
 
eMCee85 said:
Me too! How the hell is he gonna say Tua doesn't have highlight film plays? Lol
Click to expand...

That's because they're not considered Tua hi lites.

They're considered Hill's highlights lol.

Remember, we gotta follow the evolving narrative of so many who are scared Tua will win MVP and make them all look foolish
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom