Golston Made An Impact In Rookie Season

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:06 am

Golston Made An Impact In Rookie Season

Very quietly, Kedric Golston emerged as a regular starter on the Redskins' defensive line in 2006. The rookie defensive tackle started 12 consecutive games and 13 of 16 games last season.
Entering the 2006 campaign, veterans Cornelius Griffin and Joe Salave'a were involved in primary base packages employed by assistant head coach-defense Gregg Williams. At first, Golston was moved into the starting lineup when Griffin and Salave'a were slowed by injuries.

Golston stayed in the lineup, though, even as Griffin and Salave'a were healthy. He started along-side Griffin, with Salave'a still seeing extensive playing time in the defensive line rotation.

In the Week 13 game against Atlanta, Golston came through with a key tackle in the first half when he stuffed Falcons quarterback Michael Vick on a 4th-and-1 play.

The stats sheet showed that Griffin and Marcus Washington combined for the tackle, but television replays revealed that it was actually Golston who stopped Vick's dive across past right guard Tyson Clabo.

Golston finished with 59 tackles last season, along with a half-sack. He combined with middle linebacker Lemar Marshall on a sack of Houston Texans quarterback David Carr earlier in the season.

Golston said that, upon entering the NFL as the Redskins' sixth-round draft choice last April, he had no expectations in terms of developing into a starter.

"I don't really worry about [starting]," he said. "When coaches tell me to go in, I go in. When they tell me to come out, I come out. All I try to do is make myself better by making the team better.

"Hopefully the coaches feel that they can trust me. I make my mistakes, but I'm just trying to get better."

The 6-4, 292-pounder says that defensive coordinator-defensive line coach Greg Blache has helped him improve his technique, particularly in his ability to shed blockers and stay square at the line of scrimmage.

Golston knows he has plenty of work to do this offseason. The Redskins' defense struggled against the run, yielding 197 and 261 yards in the last two regular-season games.

Golston said his toughest adjustment was in the mental side of the game.

"You're forced to learn more mentally about the game because everybody is big and strong in this league," he said. "You have to use everything you've learned, and it speeds up the learning process as far as technique."

Said Williams: "Week by week, Kedric is becoming more technique proficient and his understanding of situations is also improving. That only comes through experience. You try to do that in the meeting rooms, you talk about it and you try to prepare for it in practice, but you're going to have to put him through that under stress in a ball game.

"Can you execute under pressure in a ball game? He's becoming more relaxed in that respect on knowing how to play a situation in a game."

sch1977 · Post by **sch1977** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:22 am

I think Golston is going to be a late round gem for us. It's about time we got one! :wink:

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:48 am

Yea, this is looking like a great pickup.

So, it's only a matter of a few years until some other team signs him for a slightly-higher free agent contract. Isn't that awesome about today's NFL?

redskindave · Post by **redskindave** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:58 am

Kedric Golston is going to be very good, I like this guy alot, He was a good pick up

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:21 am

In my opinion, Golston and Montgomery will become our new interior d-line in the next 2-3 seasons, and they will dominate on one of our deep-playoff-to-Superbowl teams. Not bad for a 5th and 6th rounder.

(gotta have faith)

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:49 am

Irn-Bru wrote:In my opinion, Golston and Montgomery will become our new interior d-line in the next 2-3 seasons, and they will dominate on one of our deep-playoff-to-Superbowl teams. Not bad for a 5th and 6th rounder.

(gotta have faith)

You very well may be right. He was profiled in the Post early in the season, and according to that article, he was a much higher prospect early in his college career until a significant knee injury caused him to miss college time and fall off the draft radar. Picking him was a gamble, but the smart kind of gamble in my opinion (and what 6th round pick isn't a gamble?). Assuming his knee heals up fine (which it apparently has), the talent is still there, and we got him as cheap as possible. Plus, as a lower round pick, he's hungry, humble, and has a slight chip on his shoulder. He's looking like a pick our front office got right.

VASkin27 · Post by **VASkin27** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:11 pm

Golston is the reason I think we should go after a good pass rushing D-End, like Gaines Adams. Branch would be an upgrade and is a good 40 pounds heavier than Golston, but I really have more confidence in Golston to turn into a great player than I do in our ends to get to the QB.

SkinzCanes · Post by **SkinzCanes** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:16 pm

In my opinion, Golston and Montgomery will become our new interior d-line in the next 2-3 seasons, and they will dominate on one of our deep-playoff-to-Superbowl teams. Not bad for a 5th and 6th rounder.

I agree that Golston has a chance to be an anchor on the line, however, I disagree about Montgomery. Haven't been impressed at all with what I've seen from him.

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:37 pm

Mursilis wrote:Picking him was a gamble, but the smart kind of gamble in my opinion (and what 6th round pick isn't a gamble?). Assuming his knee heals up fine (which it apparently has), the talent is still there, and we got him as cheap as possible. Plus, as a lower round pick, he's hungry, humble, and has a slight chip on his shoulder. He's looking like a pick our front office got right.

Actually, I tend to think that it's the first five rounds that are a gamble, because that's when you can end up looking stupid. But rounds 6 and 7 are where I think you should gamble on players like this. Pick the consensus guys early on, because all that research that everybody's done means that the averages favour the highly ranked players. After that though, I'm all for picking up players who have slipped down the rankings due to injury.

I'd call it the Timmy Smith Method (although I admit he was a 4th rounder).

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:47 pm

If Golston is any good... it's only a matter of time before the Redskins management (a confusing morass of front office personnel with no organization) signs marginally better but infinitely flashier and more expensive replacements.

Idiots. (Speaking of course about the Redskins front office.)

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:48 pm

SkinzCanes wrote:
In my opinion, Golston and Montgomery will become our new interior d-line in the next 2-3 seasons, and they will dominate on one of our deep-playoff-to-Superbowl teams. Not bad for a 5th and 6th rounder.

I agree that Golston has a chance to be an anchor on the line, however, I disagree about Montgomery. Haven't been impressed at all with what I've seen from him.

You give Montgomery one season and then say that he doesn't have a chance to be an anchor on the line? That's a pretty quick judgment on him as a player. . .

By the same reasoning, I don't have much to praise him for; although, with what little I saw of him with my own eyes, I thought that he played well for us this season. In addition, he had a lot of upside coming out of the draft (according to several sources), so it may take a while for all of that potential to develop if it does. Given that we had pretty good starters on our d-line (Griffin, Salave'a, and the surprise that Golston was) -- and not to mention last year's players that Montgomery had to beat out (Boschetti and Killings, both playing well) to even secure a roster spot -- I'd say that he had a pretty good rookie campaign. Let's see what he can do next year.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:25 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
SkinzCanes wrote:
In my opinion, Golston and Montgomery will become our new interior d-line in the next 2-3 seasons, and they will dominate on one of our deep-playoff-to-Superbowl teams. Not bad for a 5th and 6th rounder.

I agree that Golston has a chance to be an anchor on the line, however, I disagree about Montgomery. Haven't been impressed at all with what I've seen from him.

You give Montgomery one season and then say that he doesn't have a chance to be an anchor on the line? That's a pretty quick judgment on him as a player. . .

By the same reasoning, I don't have much to praise him for; although, with what little I saw of him with my own eyes, I thought that he played well for us this season. In addition, he had a lot of upside coming out of the draft (according to several sources), so it may take a while for all of that potential to develop if it does. Given that we had pretty good starters on our d-line (Griffin, Salave'a, and the surprise that Golston was) -- and not to mention last year's players that Montgomery had to beat out (Boschetti and Killings, both playing well) to even secure a roster spot -- I'd say that he had a pretty good rookie campaign. Let's see what he can do next year.

Is this a joke?

Did you not just say on the other page that you thought Golston and Montgomery were our interior line of the future?

When you base a positive assessment of a player on one year it's faith, or being a good fan (I disagree faith alone makes one a good fan, unlike others here) but if someone bases a negative opinion of a player on one season they're making too quick a judgement.

I see how it works.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:27 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:In my opinion, Golston and Montgomery will become our new interior d-line in the next 2-3 seasons, and they will dominate on one of our deep-playoff-to-Superbowl teams. Not bad for a 5th and 6th rounder.

(gotta have faith)

If this is true then we should use our first round pick on Calvin Johnson.

VASkin27 · Post by **VASkin27** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:48 pm

Please say that was sarcastic.

First, Johnson probably won't be on the board by the time we get to him.

Second, we have three receivers that can play..

Third, and most important, we have NO pass rush from our ends, a beat-up and underachieving secondary, and needed improvement in our MLB spot. If we draft Johnson I might break my T.V.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:20 am

Skinsfan55 wrote:Is this a joke?

Did you not just say on the other page that you thought Golston and Montgomery were our interior line of the future?

When you base a positive assessment of a player on one year it's faith, or being a good fan (I disagree faith alone makes one a good fan, unlike others here) but if someone bases a negative opinion of a player on one season they're making too quick a judgement.

I see how it works.

* Yes, I said that Golston and Montgomery will be our d-line of the future (in my opinion).

* I don't base my assessment of Montgomery on one year of play. In fact, if you read my last post, I listed several other reasons to think that Montgomery had a good start to his career.

* I don't see where the whole 'good fan' thing is coming from -- you're the only one to bring that up. It's like playing the race card or the class warfare card -- it sounds good to certain ears, but it lacks substance when it comes to dialogue.

* My quibble with SkinzCanes comes from his assertion that Montgomery has no chance to be a force on our d-line in the future. He based this off of what he saw of Montgomery in '06. The basis of my disagreement was: (1) what I saw of him made me like him (I recall that he had some tackles and a sack, despite playing a backup role in only a few games), (2) a lot of Montgomery's value to us right now is his potential and upside, (3) it can take players several years to develop.

How does any of that seem like a joke to you? Instead of crying (faux) hypocrisy, why don't you bring something to the table yourself?

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:25 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:How does any of that seem like a joke to you? Instead of crying (faux) hypocrisy, why don't you bring something to the table yourself?

Why would he start doing that now?

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:02 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:Is this a joke?

Did you not just say on the other page that you thought Golston and Montgomery were our interior line of the future?

When you base a positive assessment of a player on one year it's faith, or being a good fan (I disagree faith alone makes one a good fan, unlike others here) but if someone bases a negative opinion of a player on one season they're making too quick a judgement.

I see how it works.

* Yes, I said that Golston and Montgomery will be our d-line of the future (in my opinion).

* I don't base my assessment of Montgomery on one year of play. In fact, if you read my last post, I listed several other reasons to think that Montgomery had a good start to his career.

* I don't see where the whole 'good fan' thing is coming from -- you're the only one to bring that up. It's like playing the race card or the class warfare card -- it sounds good to certain ears, but it lacks substance when it comes to dialogue.

* My quibble with SkinzCanes comes from his assertion that Montgomery has no chance to be a force on our d-line in the future. He based this off of what he saw of Montgomery in '06. The basis of my disagreement was: (1) what I saw of him made me like him (I recall that he had some tackles and a sack, despite playing a backup role in only a few games), (2) a lot of Montgomery's value to us right now is his potential and upside, (3) it can take players several years to develop.

How does any of that seem like a joke to you? Instead of crying (faux) hypocrisy, why don't you bring something to the table yourself?

Dude, you made a completely unqualified guess about Montgomery and Golston being our interior line of the future (based on 9 tackles from Monty and a season of part time duty from Golston.) and then a few posts later told someone who said that they saw nothing promising in Montgomery.

Sure, you're speaking in "chances" but saying you think he (Montgomery) will anchor the line in 2-3 years is no less ridiculous than another poster saying he disagrees with you.

The cherry on top is you saying:

"You give Montgomery one season and then say that he doesn't have a chance to be an anchor on the line? That's a pretty quick judgment on him as a player. . ."

Personally I think the tone of the board is is changing to one where people just come to "agree" about the Redskins, and open discussion is more or less discouraged.

In any case, call it faux hypocrisy if it makes you feel better, but it's all right there in burgundy and white, and it looks ridiculous.

Yes, Golston had a promising season, he's not part of this discussion.

But saying Montgomery is going to anchor the line in 2-3 years is borderline foolish... scolding a fellow poster for disagreeing and then "reminding" them that this is only his first season (in which he hardly played) is just complete nonsense.

PS- Oh, and I stand by my earlier statement. If Golston is actually a decent player, the Redskins will trade him and a top draft pick for some player who is overrated, flashy, and most importantly only marginally more talented.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:35 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:Dude, you made a completely unqualified guess about Montgomery and Golston being our interior line of the future (based on 9 tackles from Monty and a season of part time duty from Golston.) and then a few posts later told someone who said that they saw nothing promising in Montgomery.

Again, I didn't base my assessment of Montgomery entirely on what I saw from him in games this past year.

Sure, you're speaking in "chances" but saying you think he (Montgomery) will anchor the line in 2-3 years is no less ridiculous than another poster saying he disagrees with you.

I don't mind if a poster disagrees with me. I was arguing against his point because he based his disagreement with me on the statement that "Haven't been impressed at all with what I've seen from him."

In my counterargument, I state my opinion based on what I've seen (and I like it), and then I add a few more points as to why I think Montgomery has some promise. Who said anything about ridiculous, aside from you? SkinzCanes and I disagree quite a bit on the boards, but that doesn't mean that I automatically set out to make him my enemy. In my opinion, his original counterargument displayed a rather quick judgment on Montgomery's abilities.

The cherry on top is you saying:

"You give Montgomery one season and then say that he doesn't have a chance to be an anchor on the line? That's a pretty quick judgment on him as a player. . ."

Good, you found the disagreement. Too bad you read so much into it.

Personally I think the tone of the board is is changing to one where people just come to "agree" about the Redskins, and open discussion is more or less discouraged.

Open discussion is discouraged. Could you provide an example? Cheers.

In any case, call it faux hypocrisy if it makes you feel better, but it's all right there in burgundy and white, and it looks ridiculous.

Remember: you are the first person to bring up 'ridiculous' when it comes to comments. It's funny that you haven't given a single counter-argument. . .aside from mere assertions:

But saying Montgomery is going to anchor the line in 2-3 years is borderline foolish... scolding a fellow poster for disagreeing and then "reminding" them that this is only his first season (in which he hardly played) is just complete nonsense.

The substance of your argument is that my opinion was borderline foolish. . . .because. . . .well, just because, I guess.

"Scolding a fellow poster." I love it. Keep playing that angle, maybe you'll create a fight where there was none. Nothing in what I said was an attempt to shut down conversation -- I offered counterpoints to SkinzCanes original argument. One of the nice things about debating with SkinzCanes is that he doesn't take things personally but will offer (usually good) arguments in a debate. I enjoy engaging him -- despite the fact that we often disagree -- because he's good at getting to the heart of the issues.

So take your board-conflict ideas elsewhere. . .this debate was only that until you came in crying hypocrisy, ridiculousness, and foolishness. Notice how little those assessments advance any dialogue?

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:47 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
Skinsfan55 wrote:Dude, you made a completely unqualified guess about Montgomery and Golston being our interior line of the future (based on 9 tackles from Monty and a season of part time duty from Golston.) and then a few posts later told someone who said that they saw nothing promising in Montgomery.

Again, I didn't base my assessment of Montgomery entirely on what I saw from him in games this past year.

Sure, you're speaking in "chances" but saying you think he (Montgomery) will anchor the line in 2-3 years is no less ridiculous than another poster saying he disagrees with you.

I don't mind if a poster disagrees with me. I was arguing against his point because he based his disagreement with me on the statement that "Haven't been impressed at all with what I've seen from him."

In my counterargument, I state my opinion based on what I've seen (and I like it), and then I add a few more points as to why I think Montgomery has some promise. Who said anything about ridiculous, aside from you? SkinzCanes and I disagree quite a bit on the boards, but that doesn't mean that I automatically set out to make him my enemy. In my opinion, his original counterargument displayed a rather quick judgment on Montgomery's abilities.

The cherry on top is you saying:

"You give Montgomery one season and then say that he doesn't have a chance to be an anchor on the line? That's a pretty quick judgment on him as a player. . ."

Good, you found the disagreement. Too bad you read so much into it.

Personally I think the tone of the board is is changing to one where people just come to "agree" about the Redskins, and open discussion is more or less discouraged.

Open discussion is discouraged. Could you provide an example? Cheers.

In any case, call it faux hypocrisy if it makes you feel better, but it's all right there in burgundy and white, and it looks ridiculous.

Remember: you are the first person to bring up 'ridiculous' when it comes to comments. It's funny that you haven't given a single counter-argument. . .aside from mere assertions:

But saying Montgomery is going to anchor the line in 2-3 years is borderline foolish... scolding a fellow poster for disagreeing and then "reminding" them that this is only his first season (in which he hardly played) is just complete nonsense.

The substance of your argument is that my opinion was borderline foolish. . . .because. . . .well, just because, I guess.

"Scolding a fellow poster." I love it. Keep playing that angle, maybe you'll create a fight where there was none. Nothing in what I said was an attempt to shut down conversation -- I offered counterpoints to SkinzCanes original argument. One of the nice things about debating with SkinzCanes is that he doesn't take things personally but will offer (usually good) arguments in a debate. I enjoy engaging him -- despite the fact that we often disagree -- because he's good at getting to the heart of the issues.

So take your board-conflict ideas elsewhere. . .this debate was only that until you came in crying hypocrisy, ridiculousness, and foolishness. Notice how little those assessments advance any dialogue?

Game.
Set.
Match.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:10 pm

This is getting ridiculous.

Why can't you just admit to your hypocrisy and drop it instead of making a big crusade out of it?

Oh well.

This is really taking the thread off track, especially since we're now talking about Montgomery and not Golston at all.

I just thought it ws silly that you would say one thing based on hardly any evidence and then be quick to correct someone who shared a contrary opinion using the lack of evidence as your chief motivation.

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:38 pm

Skinsfan55 wrote:This is really taking the thread off track, especially since we're now talking about Montgomery and not Golston at all.

You are not a moderator, we don't need your help

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:52 pm

This is a message board, if you don't want someone to refute something you've said, then I'd suggest you don't post. :wink:

Otherwise, I see no reason for complaining. Thanks.

I think Golston had a monster year for a rookie late rounder.

I also think that people should remember that in a sea of crap, it's easy to shine.

:-)

brad7686 · Post by **brad7686** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:04 pm

Weren't Golston and Montgomery the starters when Travis Henry torched us vs. Tennessee? I do think Golston is a force and is very athletic, even for a one gap DT, but I have not been impressed with Montgomery at all. He just takes up space at the moment.

Skinsfan55 · Post by **Skinsfan55** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:16 pm

BossHog wrote:I think Golston had a monster year for a rookie late rounder.

I also think that people should remember that in a sea of crap, it's easy to shine.

I totally agree.

Golston had a great year for a rookie (especially considering that it seems most rookie defensive linemen start rather slowly.)

Still, building long term plans around him based on what he did during a season where our defense is awful seems silly.

Even if we got other defensive linemen in the draft and so forth having Golston as 3rd on the depth chart among DT's wouldn't be so bad.

The last time the Redskins won the Superbowl they had:

Jumpy Geathers
Tim Johnson
Fred Stokes
and
Bobby Wilson all play in 16 games with:

Charles Mann
and
Eric Williams

In 15 games a piece. Jason Buck (8 games) and Marcus Koch (6) also played big roles on the line.

It's good to have a rotation where you have set starters, but also guys who can come in and play on long drives, certain situations, etc.

I wouldn't ink Golston in for a starting slot yet... but having him fight for a spot in training camp would be awesome. IMO we can turn the defensive line from a big weakness in 2006 to a strength in 2007 just by adding a couple key players to the unit and reducing the roles of Golston and Daniels to part time players. That would give us excellent depth.

And as we all know, depth is something the Washington Redskins sorely lacked in 2006.