Player Stats

C.J. Goetz College Stats

Career production, season-by-season totals, and the selected-season workbench are grouped here for stat-first searches.

Stat Footprint

Career production snapshot

Tackles
144
TFL
25.5
Sacks
9
QB hurries
7
Passes defended
3

Season Ledger

Crawlable season-by-season stats

SeasonTeamGamesTacklesTFLSacksQB HurPDTDOverall
2019 Regular SeasonWisconsin00-0--0-
2020 Regular SeasonWisconsin410212-036.5
2021 PostseasonWisconsin82-0--022.2
2021 Regular SeasonWisconsin8153.52--022.2
2022 Regular SeasonWisconsin125892-1044.7
2023 PostseasonWisconsin135-0--070.6
2023 Regular SeasonWisconsin135411452070.6

Player insights

Lead takeaway

Best season by value score: 2023 Postseason

Wisconsin paired 23 primary output with 36.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

2023 Postseason role shape

impact-led usage with 36.6 efficiency.

Supporting note

Career value stayed steady

2023 Regular Season tracked close to the prior stop by season value score.

Supporting note

Peak game by takeover score: Rutgers

Win with 4 impact plays across the defensive snap sheet. It landed in the 100th percentile of the selected season.

Analysis workspace

Season Workbench

Filter the strongest season sample, inspect game-level shape, and compare the statistical profile without scrolling through the full player page.

Season Explorer

Understand the selected season before dropping into the full game log.

2023 Postseason · Wisconsin

Games

13

Havoc Plays / G

1.8

Efficiency

36.6

Usage

10.9

Consistency

54.7

Best Game by takeover score

Rutgers

Hover a point or expand a game row to keep the active game context visible here.

Active game

Hover over a point

Hover or select a game to keep its context visible here without the page shifting around.

Game-by-Game Trend

Follow how the selected stat changes from one game to the next. Spikes mark standout outings, while dips show quieter weeks.

12345678910111213

Chronological game order.

Game by game trend chart. LSU: 0. Buffalo: 0. Washington State: 1. Georgia Southern: 4. Purdue: 0. Rutgers: 4. Iowa: 3.5. Illinois: 3. Ohio State: 3. Indiana: 2.5. Northwestern: 0. Nebraska: 2. Minnesota: 0

Volume vs Efficiency

Each dot is a game. Farther right means the player carried more of the workload, and higher means they were more efficient with those chances.

Low volumeHigh quality

High volumeHigh quality

Low volumeLower quality

High volumeLower quality

Volume on the x-axis, quality on the y-axis.

Volume versus efficiency scatter chart. LSU: 5 by 20.8. Buffalo: 1 by 4.2. Washington State: 3 by 22.5. Georgia Southern: 1 by 44.2. Purdue: 2 by 8.3. Rutgers: 3 by 52.5. Iowa: 5 by 55.8. Illinois: 10 by 71.7. Ohio State: 5 by 50.8. Indiana: 12 by 75. Northwestern: 5 by 20.8. Nebraska: 3 by 32.5. Minnesota: 4 by 16.7

Split Comparison

Compare how this player performed across different situations. "Games" shows how many matchups are included in each split.

Wins1.9 · Games = 7 · +0.2 vs Losses
Losses1.7 · Games = 6 · -0.2 vs Wins