Question about Jay Bromley

know they rotate D linemen so I'm guessing if he makes the team he will see playing time

Q: What have you seen from Jay Bromley so far and what do you think his role can be?

Robert Nunn: He’s real raw. Really needs to work on his technique and he needs every rep he can get. But he’s very eager, has a great attitude, good personality, fits in the room. He’s off to a good start but he needs time. Again, it’s hard to tell anything until we get pads on with linemen. So we’ll see where it goes once the pads come on, but I like where he is as far as his eagerness and he is very aware, on top of everything, has picked up on everything, done an outstanding job picking up the defense. He’s a really exciting prospect.

...slowly unless they're extraordinary. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Bromley play very little this year unless he's forced to by circumstances. The transition from college to pro-level DL can be one of the most difficult in football.

going for him.

In comment 11782227 MOOPS said:

Quote:

going for him.

And he fits in the room.

.

Not understanding the Bromley pick. And the fact that he is "raw" is exactly why. Reese has an abundance of rawness on this roster...not sure he can afford this type of player in the 3rd.

In comment 11782224 BMac said:

Quote:

...slowly unless they're extraordinary. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Bromley play very little this year unless he's forced to by circumstances. The transition from college to pro-level DL can be one of the most difficult in football.

DT, most difficult position to learn in football?

Kelsey Quarles. As a 3rd round pick against a UFA, there shouldn't be any real competition.

Was a health scratch his entire rookie year, and that pick turned into a reasonable quality player. I wouldn't read too much into anything, this early (and not just on Bromley).

Is going to spend most games innactive. He's also a 3 tech guy and there's zero chance he is even close to Jenkins and Patterson by the beginning of the year. He ensures that there will be 5 DTs on the roster this year. Kuhn IMO will back up Hankins most likely. Bromley will lift learn and this year for the most part barring injury.

In comment 11782272 section125 said:

Quote:

In comment 11782224 BMac said: Quote: ...slowly unless they're extraordinary. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Bromley play very little this year unless he's forced to by circumstances. The transition from college to pro-level DL can be one of the most difficult in football. DT, most difficult position to learn in football?

I don't know if it's so much the learning that is most difficult.

It may be more the physicality of the position...but I have also read that DT is one of the toughest transitions from college to pro.

There were a couple of highly regarded offensive Guards and Wide receivers available at that pick.

Not expecting much from him this year, but can't say he is a bust until year two or three.

The question is if teams can afford to essentially redshirt a player in this environment?

Last year we did it with Hankins, Taylor, Herman, Moore, and Cox.

get pounded from all sides like cosmic pinball. Of course Nunn has it correctly. You have to see how he plays in pads. How does he react to the claustrophobic inside pounding? Bromley didn't play in a wave rotation at SU. He's used to fighting through fatigue. He didn't play on a d-.line his last couple of college years that had any NFL talent on it, much less the overall first-pick in the Draft.

Of course it would have been much more encouraging if his position coach said he was lazy, distracted and truculent.

In comment 11782337 Reale01 said:

Quote:

There were a couple of highly regarded offensive Guards and Wide receivers available at that pick. Not expecting much from him this year, but can't say he is a bust until year two or three. The question is if teams can afford to essentially redshirt a player in this environment? Last year we did it with Hankins, Taylor, Herman, Moore, and Cox.

This.

In comment 11782272 section125 said:

Quote:

In comment 11782224 BMac said: Quote: ...slowly unless they're extraordinary. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Bromley play very little this year unless he's forced to by circumstances. The transition from college to pro-level DL can be one of the most difficult in football. DT, most difficult position to learn in football?

Yup.

about how good he'll be with a year of coaching under his belt, not whether he could be a starter this year.

What is the likelihood that we will need a new starter at DT in 2015? Pretty likely IMHO, because Mike Patterson and Cullen Jenkins aren't getting any younger, and Kuhn is 28.

If Bromley had "immediate starter" potential, he would not have lasted until the third round.

But- This team is/was in need of starters, and Reese selects a project in the 3rd. Was that wise?

Could be used in the rotation, especially if someone gets dinged up.

and you won't be disappointed...

Have been DTs that project to be 1 year or so away.

Joseph and Hankins fit this same profile.

In comment 11782266 drkenneth said:

Quote:

Not understanding the Bromley pick. And the fact that he is "raw" is exactly why. Reese has an abundance of rawness on this roster...not sure he can afford this type of player in the 3rd.

I replied to your comment shortly after you posted it, but I'll do it again now.

DT was a pressing need, what with Jenkins and Patterson on the wrong side of 30, and the 28 year-old Kuhn still a big question mark. By the time pick #74 rolled around, the top-tier DTs were gone, and if the Giants didn't pick Bromley - a guy they'd shown interest in prior to the draft - when they had the chance, it's likely that he, too, would have been gone well before the Giants picked in the 4th round. JR struck while the iron was hot. Forget what the pundits said before the draft and go back and see how it actually unfolded.

As long as the Giants have Jenkins, Patterson, Hankins, and Kuhn, they can certainly afford "raw." The last rookie DT to start for the Giants was Barry Cofield (2006), but his competition was nowhere near as tough as Bromley's, or Linval Joseph's, for that matter, four years after Cofield. Regardless, Bromley was not drafted because the Giants felt that he could make an immediate impact. As with JPP, he was drafted with an eye towards the future. That says "wise" to me.

I hear you...But, the theme for this draft was "stop drafting raw/project players."

You say that the team could afford a project at DT, but the team had/has a desperate need for immediate starters at other positions (OL/WR/LB), and they instead took a "raw" DT.

Is that they smart play? Not arguing, just a question.

You're basically say that we are set at DT, yet draft a project. Meanwhile, starting caliber OL and WR just sat there in the 3rd.

What am I missing?

In comment 11782469 drkenneth said:

Quote:

You're basically say that we are set at DT, yet draft a project. Meanwhile, starting caliber OL and WR just sat there in the 3rd. What am I missing?

Maybe you missed that we already drafted a WR in round one and the staff felt like we had enough there

Furthermore, how do you know the guards in rd 3 are starting caliber?

Maybe the staff felt differently, especially since we signed Schwartz, Jerry and Richburg can play Guard as well

Bromley is going to be asked to play as a 2 or 3 technique. However, he had his most success as a 5 technique pass rushing. Although he was knocked around by a good college center in the Minn/Syracuse game, he did not show any run awareness or ability to hold his ground when the run came his way.

Maybe, he just needs to learn. But I see this as another JR special. I.e., another reach in a premium round draft selection.

Oh, BTW, that is bull that there were no other DTs out there when Bromley was drafted. The big NT from Notre Dame (Nix) was available and he will be a force in the NFL. JR just had a brain freeze!

In comment 11782475 royhobbs7 said:

Quote:

Bromley is going to be asked to play as a 2 or 3 technique. However, he had his most success as a 5 technique pass rushing. Although he was knocked around by a good college center in the Minn/Syracuse game, he did not show any run awareness or ability to hold his ground when the run came his way. Maybe, he just needs to learn. But I see this as another JR special. I.e., another reach in a premium Oh, BTW, that is bull that there were no other DTs out there when Bromley was drafted. The big NT from Notre Dame (Nix) was available and he will be a force in the NFL. JR just had a brain freeze!

Nix is a 3-4 nose tackle.

Furthermore you are judging his entire 4 year career off one game?

Really?

He was a very productive player who improved every year and was a team captain. He also had a great week at the East-West game and performed well at the Combine. It's not like he's some bonehead they plucked off the street and gave a uniform, nor was he merely a workout-warrior with good measureables. He's still a rookie, though, and like most rookies he's going to take some time to develop, but calling him a project is unwarranted.

We're set at DT for the short-term, but the draft isn't about the short-term, it's about the future.

And speaking of the draft...there were several good OG prospects picked after Bromley, but the Giants had already signed Schwartz and Jerry, already had Mosley, and drafted Richburg. They needed a DT a lot more than they needed another OG. An OT wasn't drafted until #95, Michael Schofield, and no other until #149, Kevin Pamphile. And why draft a WR when you already drafted Beckham?

Chris Borland was drafted shortly after Bromley, and I know he had his supporters here, but to me he never fit the profile of a Giants LB. After Borland, there wasn't another LB taken until midway through the 4th round, and frankly, I think the Giants got a huge steal when Kennard fell all the way to pick #174. It will be interesting to see how Kennard does compared to the eight or nine kids drafted ahead of him.

Nix might have been a 0 technique, but he is more likely to success vs. the run than Bromley who could not sustain his ground as a 2 or a 3. He was only successful when he played inside the tackle.

Look at the films....................

being too high and many of us felt we had better DTs and or DEs that were picked lower, after, as it were.

nobody said the player was a total schlub, it was a head scratcher due to who was out there in general at 3.

as a 3/4 DE. but at 6'7" and 298 could easily grow into 330 and who, in my view had much better (i wont call it 'tape' dont want to piss off the 'coaches' here) 15 minutes of youtube than Bromley did, even getting very low and using leverage, good for such a tall player, as well as a wider variety of plays made.

seemingly more upside even though a different 'technique' ...which is over stated, IMHO.

If you go back and look at the 2014 draft, you'll notice that not only did we pass on Nix, but the Bears did, too, and they were just as hungry for DT help as we were. Why did this happen? Because we both play a base 4-3, and Nix was not a good fit for either of us. You'll also notice that Nix went to Houston, a team that plays a base 3-4.

You'll also notice that Donald, Easley, Hageman, Jernigan, and Ferguson (in other words, the top-tier) were all drafted before pick #74.

In comment 11782216 Eric from BBI said:

Quote:

Q: What have you seen from Jay Bromley so far and what do you think his role can be? Robert Nunn: He’s real raw. Really needs to work on his technique and he needs every rep he can get. But he’s very eager, has a great attitude, good personality, fits in the room. He’s off to a good start but he needs time. Again, it’s hard to tell anything until we get pads on with linemen. So we’ll see where it goes once the pads come on, but I like where he is as far as his eagerness and he is very aware, on top of everything, has picked up on everything, done an outstanding job picking up the defense. He’s a really exciting prospect.

This response is interesting. I was under the impression that Bromley was a little further along than "real raw". I had to go back through the post-draft interviews to see what led me to that belief. Here's what I found:

Quote:

Q: Do you seem Bromley as a guy who can come in and play right away? A: We hope so. He’s a big kid, he’s played at a high level of competition and he’s a strong kid. He had good reps at the combine, big, clean, hardworking, tough football player. We expect him to come in and be part of the rotation.

That was Reese. Now clearly his football background was limited, but Reese seemed to think that he would be ready to be a part of the rotation and Nunn leads me to think he'll be a season-long inactive (barring injury).

Clearly an interesting player to keep an eye out for.

In comment 11782472 phillygiant said:

Quote:

In comment 11782469 drkenneth said: Quote: You're basically say that we are set at DT, yet draft a project. Meanwhile, starting caliber OL and WR just sat there in the 3rd. What am I missing? Maybe you missed that we already drafted a WR in round one and the staff felt like we had enough there Furthermore, how do you know the guards in rd 3 are starting caliber? Maybe the staff felt differently, especially since we signed Schwartz, Jerry and Richburg can play Guard as well

Yeah, I got it. My point being there were "safer" picks available....That's all I'm saying.

Reese wasn't wasn't in a position to draft projects, considering he has a bunch of 2nd, 3rd, & 4th round duds,.

In comment 11782506 drkenneth said:

Quote:

In comment 11782472 phillygiant said: Quote: In comment 11782469 drkenneth said: Quote: You're basically say that we are set at DT, yet draft a project. Meanwhile, starting caliber OL and WR just sat there in the 3rd. What am I missing? Maybe you missed that we already drafted a WR in round one and the staff felt like we had enough there Furthermore, how do you know the guards in rd 3 are starting caliber? Maybe the staff felt differently, especially since we signed Schwartz, Jerry and Richburg can play Guard as well Yeah, I got it. My point being there were "safer" picks available....That's all I'm saying. Reese wasn't wasn't in a position to draft projects, considering he has a bunch of 2nd, 3rd, & 4th round duds,.

He's missed on 2...2nd rd picks

Sintim and Austin

with:

Tre Mason
Travis Swanson
Spencer Long
Gabe Jackson
Louis Nix
Donte Moncrief

All available?

he can be used in a 4/3 (canty or even better, many examples) and even a big true 0 "nose tackle type" can be used in a 4/3, hypothetically. in other words, you dont want to jettison individual value completely in the quest for parts of the whole.

I think, for this team 4/3, that the mobile 3/4 'de' may have more potential vs. the 'true nose', if you want to get into scheme jumpers.

another pet peeve is the smaller DEs. IF a DE can do the job, there is zero rational reason he cannot be bigger than 275.

for all those who rant about 'best player available' that seems to evaporate on D line drafting...with people going for 'types'

and..the tape and numbers. defensive linesmen that have, in addition to the ability to plug, numbers in the bat downs and fumbles recovered. those indicate more that we give credit for.

if we go WR in round 1 that it would have a negative cascading effect on the rest of the value propositions.

In comment 11782520 drkenneth said:

Quote:

with: Tre Mason Travis Swanson Spencer Long Gabe Jackson Louis Nix Donte Moncrief All available?

Absolutely. See my 7:08.

In comment 11782520 drkenneth said:
[quote] with:

Tre Mason
Travis Swanson
Spencer Long
Gabe Jackson
Louis Nix
Donte Moncrief

Again, we already addressed those positions in either free agency or the draft. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend?

second of all you have no idea how one any of those players or how Bromley is going to turn out

Quit while your ahead...your argument makes no sense

however, that does not totally preclude the value proposition.

the idea is to have both. many here are questioning the value part in bromley...even within DTs at 3, much less all positions.

we all want him to succeed.

and, being the types of geeks that we are, will note later picks progression or lack thereof fairly.

at this point it is totally fair to question it.

From Jerry Reeses comments about Jay Bromley right after drafting him

"Q: Do you seem Bromley as a guy who can come in and play right away?

A: We hope so. He’s a big kid, he’s played at a high level of competition and he’s a strong kid. He had good reps at the combine, big, clean, hardworking, tough football player. We expect him to come in and be part of the rotation."

The Giants were at least hopeful that Bromley would contribute in his initial year because he is a very determined guy with a "huge motor" Also Bromley looked very appealing to the Giants because of the combination of 10 sacks last year combined with the idea that the Giants are trying to get defensive tackles that have the potential to reach 315 to 320 and he has that potential.

I think posting a list of players that the mock draft crowd talked about before the draft doesn't make much sense, because the Giants were looking for a lot of special qualities for their defensive lineman. Logically they chose the player who best fit their needs. All one can do now is wait and see what happens.

when they picked a DT instead of the DE there at first.
with the loss of tuck and having already lost osi the year before,well maybe lost isnt the right word,i thought they
would have gone DE at that spot or OL since i thought they needed to draft 2 OL and only took 1,clearly they believe mosely or one of FA signings were a better bet than a rookie at that spot

but like the year before reese used the draft to build his roster with talent that can take over the following year and guys with potential at more than 1 spot or who could come in to cover injury, and bromley has potential to give them that,they can also field a huge jumbo DL on goal line stands with jenkins,bromley and hankins beside jpp

they obviously liked what they had in moore enough they felt comfortable with taking a DT over a DE,i loved the moore pick and personally think he shows himself a steal this year so thinking about it after the pick it made sense

i had wanted the giants to bring in bigger NT type DT for a while, thats what the better giants defences of old had,it won a superbowl for baltimore with goose and adams clogging up the middle of the line and it works,you need some physicality in the middle of the defence,force plays out wide where your DE or LB can have a shot to make a play for a loss and tire RB making them run further/harder to get the same yardage

the real problem is that the giants pick guys that arent talked about in mock drafts and shock people taking guys at one position over another they see as need and people get tunnel vision regarding a certain position

i was guilty of that myself i thought the OL required a first round pick,the giants think beckham was a better pick than an OL with the accepted blue chip OL already gone i can accept that beckham makes more sense

they got one of the best WR in the draft,one who many people are picking to be the best WR in that draft,the highest rated OC in the draft,a well regarded DT,a very productive RB who lead the college game in rushing yards and some talented guys like kennard to round the draft out
it wasnt the big names that some fans wanted but i want them to pick the better players, not the better known names

Will carry any other combination of DL than these guys:

Ayers
Kiwi
JPP
Moore
Jenkins
Patterson
Hankins
Kuhn
Bromley?

Barring injury, these 9 and only these 9. Bromley is the developmental guy. Most likely inactive week to week unless someone ahead of him is hurt or he vastly outperforms any reasonable expectations.

Understand that. The only way he takes meaningful snaps is by way of injury or if he outperforms his draft status. 3rd round rookie DTs generally don't start or rotate in this league. For anyone.

Frankly I'm a little concerned that it looks like we only have 9 guys worthy of making a 2014 NFL roster. A few missed games among starters and Bromley will be rotating in and we'll be activating URFA off the practice squad or scouring the waiver wire for depth.

About the rotational thing.

Hankins and Kuhn both got meaningful rotational DT snaps as rookies.

Don't think Joeseph did. And if course Austin washed out.

In comment 11782538 phillygiant said:

Quote:

In comment 11782520 drkenneth said: [quote] with: Tre Mason Travis Swanson Spencer Long Gabe Jackson Louis Nix Donte Moncrief Again, we already addressed those positions in either free agency or the draft. Why is that so hard for you to comprehend? second of all you have no idea how one any of those players or how Bromley is going to turn out Quit while your ahead...your argument makes no sense

Why does it make no sense?

-I understand your argument completely. Mine is that Reese had been struggling with the 2-4th round picks, and picking a developmental DT from Syracuse in the 3rd round was a head scratcher for me (I'm not the only one).

I don't give a shit what we addressed in the earlier round & FA...You pick the best player available. Reese wasn't in a position to grab a project there...but he did. So if if Bromley sits all year (which likely) and doesn't make an impact in year 2, he'll be ushered out on the same bus that took/will take: Sintim, Brewer, Robinson, Hosley, Phillip Dillard, Ramese Barden, Travis Beckum out of town.

Neither of us knows what Bromley will become, I get that. My only point was that the focus of the this draft was to stay away from projects. Any Bromley seems like a project, especially in the 3rd.

That's all I'm saying. Is that such a ridiculous position to take?

So maybe I'm biased, but I've also seen much more of Bromley than most here. Bromley is MUCH better than the nay sayers here are screaming. He is a very good football player. He's a leader and he's tough as nails. Once he gets on an NFL strength program and tightens up his technique a bit, Giants fans are going to love him.

that really nobody else left had. Despite his college experience a lot of us thought he was raw and his position coach seems to think likewise. I watched a lot of Urban in college, he was a decent player and may yet be a good rotational player but nothing about him screamed "future star." He looks like a 5-technique and the number of 6'7" 1 and 3 techniques is pretty limited. My issue isn't that they picked Bromley over Urban, it's that they picked Bromley over a guy at another position whose attraction wasn't just being the "last" of something.

But I think you are taking a ridiculous position. Without question, what you do in free agency will impact what you do in the draft. Look no further than 2011, when the inability to sign FA QBs compelled some teams to draft a couple much earlier than they probably would have. Also, no one drafts strictly BPA anymore, regardless of what they say publicly.

As for prospect list, I addressed it earlier, but, honestly, would you expect a team that signed J.D. Walton and drafted Weston Richburg in the 2nd round to then draft Travis Swanson in the 3rd? I'd love to see that draft day thread.

I still don't see why drafting a DT - developmental or otherwise - is such a head-scratcher for you? It was a pressing need, and quite a few of us were hoping that the Giants would draft a good 3-tech prospect. I was hoping they'd draft Aaron Donald, but Jay Bromley was my second choice, and I said so in numerous threads.

As for Bromley being a "project," I don't think he is. The vast majority of DTs drafted after the 1st round are going to take time to develop. The Ndomakong Suhs of the world don't fall to the 3rd round very often. Sure, the Giants struck gold with Barry Cofield, but I think he's the exception that proves the rule. Regardless, Bromley has everything you look for in a good prospect, which is why Coach Nunn, while saying that Bromley is "raw," also said that he's a "really exciting prospect." "Project" is a pejorative term that denigrates Bromley's experience, talent, heart, work ethic, and potential. To me, it's completely unwarranted to label Bromley a project.

.

Because his backstory is so compelling. I don't think I've ever rooted this hard for a kid to succeed. Maybe Mark Herzlich, but for a different reason, obviously.

My only reservation is that this team does not have a great history of developing players, IMO. First and second rounders may take a red shirt year before producing when they get their shot in year 2 or so, but rounds 3 and on are loaded with developmental picks that never pan out. I'm not saying there aren't exceptions, but these guys come and go year after year with very few ever emerging as long term starters. So I'm not holding my breath, but of course taking a wait and see attitude.

Was watching the Giants.com interview - wonder what Coughlin thought about JB referring to him as "that old Grandpa".

In comment 11782822 UberAlias said:

Quote:

My only reservation is that this team does not have a great history of developing players, IMO. First and second rounders may take a red shirt year before producing when they get their shot in year 2 or so, but rounds 3 and on are loaded with developmental picks that never pan out. I'm not saying there aren't exceptions, but these guys come and go year after year with very few ever emerging as long term starters. So I'm not holding my breath, but of course taking a wait and see attitude.

I actually agree with you. With the new CBA and shorter rookie deals, the rookies can't be redshirting a full season. By the time they finally get on the field and contribute, they've priced themselves out of our range for FA.

Is if you question a pick right away you ate told that you don't have enough info to criticize and to wait and see.

If you question a pick 4 years later you are told anybody can bash with hindsight.

He went earlier than I thought he would but I like Bromley. I think he could be a good DT down the road. At that point who cares if he was a 3rd or a 4th round pick.

is the sweet-spot?

nobody cares if guys question picks. It's the ones that claim Reese screwed up, should lose his job, proclaiming that Player A is much better than Player B, etc. guys that throw their opinions around as fact are the guys getting push back. Have you even read this thread? It's embarrassing. Guys are out in force to tell the world that they were right and it's obvious that Reese screwed up the draft again. They've been in camp a week. One week

I was talking more about the Donald thread, with my last comment

would have liked them to draft beckum and donald and martin and fixed all 3 positions problem was they had 1 pick not 3 and had to pick one they decided beckum gives them the best return

they had hankins and moore to take over linval and tucks spots but they didnt have a true #1 WR to replace the disinterested and broken down nicks and they believe beckum has the chance to be a starter and possible number 1

i also think macadoo's system will reduce the emphisis on the number 1 that gilbrides system did it will be more spread and finding the open guy versus forcing plays to covered recievers that led to the turnovers we saw last year (in part at least, as OL breakdown and poor WR play also played its part in that too)