Crazy Chauncey Golston factoid

T-RO

Well-Known Member
Messages
15,323
Reaction score
17,208
I really don't know what Chauncy Golston is as a player. We have so many good defensive ends in front of him. He just doesn't get playing time.

But today I spotted something which caught my eye.

Game 17 vs. Commanders was very forgettable game with little big-picture meaning. But Golston had 10 tackles! That's a huge number for a defensive end.

And they were quality tackles too. Two tackles for loss, and in those 10 plays he really suppressed yardage. Washington only gained 1.8 yards in those plays.

Could be a silly thing, like facing a bad blocker or backup. I don't know. Still, makes me more interested to see what Chauncey brings in the future. In closing: PFF likes him with 68.4. Don't think there's a third string DE in the league with such a nice score.
 
I really don't know what Chauncy Golston is as a player. We have so many good defensive ends in front of him. He just doesn't get playing time.

But today I spotted something which caught my eye.

Game 17 vs. Commanders was very forgettable game with little big-picture meaning. But Golston had 10 tackles! That's a huge number for a defensive end.

And they were quality tackles too. Two tackles for loss, and in those 10 plays he really suppressed yardage. Washington only gained 1.8 yards in those plays.

Could be a silly thing, like facing a bad blocker or backup. I don't know. Still, makes me more interested to see what Chauncey brings in the future. In closing: PFF likes him with 68.4. Don't think there's a third string DE in the league with such a nice score.
The title of your thread reminds me of the Scene in Band of Brothers when they are talking about Crazy Joe McClusky,
 
I’m sure we will ruin his career and shove him in at DT underweight and call him “hybrid”

We’ve done it before
 
Isn't he playing inside and not as a DE?
They played him there a bit in the preseason to see what he offered as an option (already have a good idea on outside) and it was “overthunk” and blown way out of proportion by fans. At 265ish he’s the backup 5tech to Lawrence and Armstrong on run downs and Fowler took the backup snaps on passing downs!
 
I really don't know what Chauncy Golston is as a player. We have so many good defensive ends in front of him. He just doesn't get playing time.

But today I spotted something which caught my eye.

Game 17 vs. Commanders was very forgettable game with little big-picture meaning. But Golston had 10 tackles! That's a huge number for a defensive end.

And they were quality tackles too. Two tackles for loss, and in those 10 plays he really suppressed yardage. Washington only gained 1.8 yards in those plays.

Could be a silly thing, like facing a bad blocker or backup. I don't know. Still, makes me more interested to see what Chauncey brings in the future. In closing: PFF likes him with 68.4. Don't think there's a third string DE in the league with such a nice score.
He is like 295 now an huge. They do not run him as a typical 1 gap DE. They run him inside a lot and when he is outside he usually is 2 gapping.
 
I’m sure we will ruin his career and shove him in at DT underweight and call him “hybrid”

We’ve done it before


He is by college career and physical size a hybrid. 6'5, 268+ pounds. Calling him such "ruins his career"?

How about trying to aim for more thoughtful posts rather than engaging the rage machine by default?
 
He only played 22 snaps that game too, 13 at end and 9 on the interior.

When I read your post I initially thought you were mad. Not possible. But yes looked it up... just 22 snaps.

10 high caliber tackles in just 22 snaps. That's crazy crazy crazy.

Again: don't know what it means as I don't take single game performances all that seriously. Especially a game 17 when neither team is highly motivated. But I'm keen to see more from Mr. Gholston.
 
He is like 295 now an huge.

You will need to prove that with hard links. Never seen anything with him above 270.

Calling your post suspect if you can't deliver evidence. I'll applaud you if you can prove 295, which you won't. Pure silliness.
 
Last edited:

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,003
Messages
14,505,691
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top