Patrick EdwardsI know Nate broke his arm, but Broyles hasn't done anything to warrant a pick up, IMO.
I do think a Detroit wide receiver will step up in Nate's absence....who else is on that roster that could emerge?
I'm not getting the Broyles thing. Why is the backup to a WR3/4 a must add?Mr. Know-It-All said:Adding Broyles - easy call considering the rest of the WRs available are garbage. Bolden in too boom or bust - one long play skews his numbers. Could he be the answer in NE until Vereen gets back? Sure. But he could just as easily be invisible.
Last week was his first game back, he only played 17 snaps, and he caught all 3 balls thrown his way for 34 yds. And that was with Burleson. He comes with risk, but he's certainly worth a pick-up.I know Nate broke his arm, but Broyles hasn't done anything to warrant a pick up, IMO.
I do think a Detroit wide receiver will step up in Nate's absence....who else is on that roster that could emerge?
Yeah - not looking to add him as a wr1 or 2...but he can easily emerge as a great bye week filler now that bye weeks start for the next 8 weeks. You could do much worse. Patrick Edwards has a bad ankle - so if Broyles is ever in a better position to live up to his hype it is now....whether his knees are ready for it is yet to be seen.I'm not getting the Broyles thing. Why is the backup to a WR3/4 a must add?Mr. Know-It-All said:Adding Broyles - easy call considering the rest of the WRs available are garbage. Bolden in too boom or bust - one long play skews his numbers. Could he be the answer in NE until Vereen gets back? Sure. But he could just as easily be invisible.
This thread down???ppierce said:Seem like 1a and 1b in ww pickup this week. Who are u guys adding?
When he took over for Burleson last year, Broyles put up several solid games--3/51/1, 6/52, 6/124, etc. The offense didn't miss a beat. His season ending injury is the only reason he wasn't starting already this season. Now he's back and ready to play, and will be stepping in to a role where he's already shown some results. I think he has a great shot at doing exactly the kinda of things Burleson has done so far.I know Nate broke his arm, but Broyles hasn't done anything to warrant a pick up, IMO.
I do think a Detroit wide receiver will step up in Nate's absence....who else is on that roster that could emerge?
lol, good luck with Broyles!I'll be picking up a wr hopefully and it won't be Broyles. Don't want to give away anything by listing any names in case anyone in my league reads this. I just really don't see Broyles doing much and as someone already mentioned Patrick Edwards could be the guy to add if you want a Detroit wr after Burleson's injury.
FWIW, Stafford has thrown 121 passes thus far in 2013.I dont get the infatuation with Broyles. Nate Burleson has basically been WW fodder his entire time on the Lions. Stafford isnt gonna start throwing it to Broyles all of a sudden. Hes still gonna target Johnson, Bush/Bell, and his TEs a ton with Broyles picking up the scraps. Plus the guy is coming off ACL injury and will likely only be used in WR3 sets.
I also dont think Bolden is a must add. Sure passing RB in NE offense has value but Danny Woodhead or Kevin Faulk has always been a bye week fill in at best. Once Amendola & Gronk come back this guy is WW fodder. Maybe hes worth a flier if you think hes gonna get the full time job but I just dont see that happening. This is a 3 headed RBBC it appears to me.
Im passing on both these guys. Have no interest in either.
Burleson has actually been a decent WR3/Flex play when healthy this season and last. Broyles looked good when he started last year. They did the same thing with him.. he had knee injury, started him a few weeks into the season.I dont get the infatuation with Broyles. Nate Burleson has basically been WW fodder his entire time on the Lions. Stafford isnt gonna start throwing it to Broyles all of a sudden. Hes still gonna target Johnson, Bush/Bell, and his TEs a ton with Broyles picking up the scraps. Plus the guy is coming off ACL injury and will likely only be used in WR3 sets.