Why Alex Boone was no longer a good fit in the Vikings' offense

“These guys are a little bit more athletic; they don’t need to be as big,” said ESPN NFL analyst Herm Edwards, who spent eight years as a head coach for the Jets and Chiefs. “They’re not the big heavy guys that are double-teaming. They’re more, ‘When the ball is snapped, get off the ball — then use your momentum as you try to stay in your gap to push you out of it, because everything is going sideways.’ Nothing is going vertical, it’s all sideways.”
The Vikings implemented plenty of zone runs in Peterson’s heyday, capitalizing on the running back’s ineffable cutback ability. Now, they will use them for Dalvin Cook, the running back they drafted in the second round out of Florida State. It was a zone scheme that helped Cook set a school rushing record as a Seminole, and it’s part of the reason why the Vikings saw him as such a good fit for their offense.

“He came from a pretty advanced offensive system at Florida State,” Shurmur said in training camp. “You saw principles of zone running, gap running and pass protection where he was involved. He was also involved in route running. He has a pretty good foundation of what we’re going to ask him to do, and I think that helps him.”
If the shift helped Cook, there’s little doubt it hurt Boone, who seemed to struggle with the changed responsibilities. 

he never lived up to his own hype or paycheck at any point that is why Boone is gone.

The only thing that worked on Boone was his mouth...

If he liked power run blocking so much you'd think he'd have gone forward once in a while.  The "2 yards and a turf burn" running game last year was as much on him as anyone else.

A 6'8" guard just doesn't seem to be optimal from a leverage standpoint inside at guard. All your power is up high and extended, best suited for tackle. DTs would get under Boone and just move him around. 

The Vikings thought they lacked pass blocking.  Boone was supposed to be a poor run blocker, but good pass blocker.  In Minnesota, he was neither.  

The reality is, the Viking line has not been good at run blocking since Steve Hutchison's first year in Minnesota (he declined rapidly after his first year here), and the pass blocking has been largely absent since the year before Culpepper left.  Folks, that's over a decade.

Easton has less talent than Boone, but works harder with what he has.  I am not at all certain that the line you see on Sept 11th will be the same by week 6.   The line has a long way to go, and I remain pessimistic about Sparano's capability.

@"Tom Moore" said: The Vikings thought they lacked pass blocking.  Boone was supposed to be a poor run blocker, but good pass blocker.  In Minnesota, he was neither.  

The reality is, the Viking line has not been good at run blocking since Steve Hutchison's first year in Minnesota (he declined rapidly after his first year here), and the pass blocking has been largely absent since the year before Culpepper left.  Folks, that's over a decade.

Easton has less talent than Boone, but works harder with what he has.  I am not at all certain that the line you see on Sept 11th will be the same by week 6.   The line has a long way to go, and I remain pessimistic about Sparano's capability.

@"Tom Moore" said: The Vikings thought they lacked pass blocking.  Boone was supposed to be a poor run blocker, but good pass blocker.  In Minnesota, he was neither.  

The reality is, the Viking line has not been good at run blocking since Steve Hutchison's first year in Minnesota (he declined rapidly after his first year here), and the pass blocking has been largely absent since the year before Culpepper left.  Folks, that's over a decade.

Easton has less talent than Boone, but works harder with what he has.  I am not at all certain that the line you see on Sept 11th will be the same by week 6.   The line has a long way to go, and I remain pessimistic about Sparano's capability.

I'm not at all sure that this is the final line up either. By week 5, I could easily see Hill at LT with Reiff moved back to RT to cover for the mess that has been Remmers.

I've got a niners fan that said it flat out,  now you know why the niners didnt try and retain him.   cant get much more basic than that.  

I often think with linemen its like that average chic that hangs out with less attractive girls to make herself look better... well those less attractive girls are also elevated because of the better looking girl that they hang with and IMO thats why boone looked attractive as a FA and why he hung on for 2 years here,  he was elevated by playing next to some better talent in san fran,  and here he looked decent simply because the others around him were so poor.  we added a few better pieces and his shortcomings are once again evident.  especially for his pay.

@"mgobluevikes" said:

@"Tom Moore" said: The Vikings thought they lacked pass blocking.  Boone was supposed to be a poor run blocker, but good pass blocker.  In Minnesota, he was neither.  

The reality is, the Viking line has not been good at run blocking since Steve Hutchison's first year in Minnesota (he declined rapidly after his first year here), and the pass blocking has been largely absent since the year before Culpepper left.  Folks, that's over a decade.

Easton has less talent than Boone, but works harder with what he has.  I am not at all certain that the line you see on Sept 11th will be the same by week 6.   The line has a long way to go, and I remain pessimistic about Sparano's capability.

Really not sure Easton has less talent than Boone. Boone has been "looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane" for years. 

I'm not at all sure that this is the final line up either. By week 5, I could easily see Hill at LT with Reiff moved back to RT to cover for the mess that has been Remmers.

@"StickyBun" said:

@"Tom Moore" said: The Vikings thought they lacked pass blocking.  Boone was supposed to be a poor run blocker, but good pass blocker.  In Minnesota, he was neither.  

The reality is, the Viking line has not been good at run blocking since Steve Hutchison's first year in Minnesota (he declined rapidly after his first year here), and the pass blocking has been largely absent since the year before Culpepper left.  Folks, that's over a decade.

Easton has less talent than Boone, but works harder with what he has.  I am not at all certain that the line you see on Sept 11th will be the same by week 6.   The line has a long way to go, and I remain pessimistic about Sparano's capability.

Its not Sparano....he's proven to be an excellent O-line coach. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit. The current starting offensive line is one of the least athletic and talented in the NFL. He's got little to work with.

@"TBro" said:

@"StickyBun" said:

@"Tom Moore" said: The Vikings thought they lacked pass blocking.  Boone was supposed to be a poor run blocker, but good pass blocker.  In Minnesota, he was neither.  

The reality is, the Viking line has not been good at run blocking since Steve Hutchison's first year in Minnesota (he declined rapidly after his first year here), and the pass blocking has been largely absent since the year before Culpepper left.  Folks, that's over a decade.

Easton has less talent than Boone, but works harder with what he has.  I am not at all certain that the line you see on Sept 11th will be the same by week 6.   The line has a long way to go, and I remain pessimistic about Sparano's capability.

Its not Sparano....he's proven to be an excellent O-line coach. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit. The current starting offensive line is one of the least athletic and talented in the NFL. He's got little to work with.

Sticky, I agree with Tom and if you look at Sporano's record, it's not impressive. Before he joined the Vikings, he only had a few stints as an Oline coach and his lines were never ranked in the top 10. I would take Tice all day every day over Sporano. He was a total meathead but man could he get the most out of the talent he had. 

My biggest worry about the current line is they have had so little time to work together.  A couple of years ago there was an article abut how it takes over a year for a,line to jell and over two years playing together to show their real potential as a group.  I think we will see better line play as the season goes along but I do worry over the first 6+ games that we could see poor line play and resulting negative reviews.

@"VikingOracle" said: My biggest worry about the current line is they have had so little time to work together.  A couple of years ago there was an article abut how it takes over a year for a,line to jell and over two years playing together to show their real potential as a group.  I think we will see better line play as the season goes along but I do worry over the first 6+ games that we could see poor line play and resulting negative reviews.

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"VikingOracle" said: My biggest worry about the current line is they have had so little time to work together.  A couple of years ago there was an article abut how it takes over a year for a,line to jell and over two years playing together to show their real potential as a group.  I think we will see better line play as the season goes along but I do worry over the first 6+ games that we could see poor line play and resulting negative reviews.

as long as they grow as the go...  we know we arent going 16-0 so I am prepared for some loses,  as long as they improve steadily I will be happy.