This is one of those worm holes.
DAL sunk a fortune into the OL and Zeke and wanted to run the ball.
Forgoing that they'd have frankly looked stupid.
All evidence points to passing efficiency as the way to win in the NFL. This is largely because passing results in big chunks that lead to points and 3rd downs being passing downs 80% of the time.
EXCEPT from the divisional round on the team that ran the ball more effectively won every game.
Also worth mentioning: for the last couple years, many of our losses resulted from under-using Elliott and the running game (especially near the goalline, but also in terms of the bigger-picture game-wide stats) or killer negative plays that occurred on specific instances of unnecessary passing play calls. Picks or sack-fumbles or penalties by our run-blocking linemen who were trying to dig a little extra deep to pass-protect. When a drive ends with a turnover or gets stalled thanks to a penalty digging us a hole, if it came on a passing play that was entirely unnecessary, it means we shot ourselves in the foot.
When a killer mistake happens on a 3rd & long passing play, that's the cost of doing business. When that killer mistake happens on a 1st & 10 pass or a 2nd & medium/short pass or a 3rd & 1, then congratulations on outsmarting yourself when you'd have been better off lining up and handing it off on a generic run play (and, let's be honest, when you have an all-world RB and have invested numerous 1st rounders into your interior o-line, your generic run plays should be basically your best plays anyway).
So I think we'd have been better off the last few years if we ran even more, not less. I can't think of many games that Elliott suited up for where we lost the game and I came out of the game saying, "Oh, bananas! We really blew it by running the ball so much." Not many instances of that. Probably not a single one.
I can think of plenty of games where we lost and I came out of the game saying, "Um, that wasn't anything close to a shootout. It was a close game and a good day for running, and our playcaller was inexplicably trying to get Dak 40+ passes while Elliott's carry total was in the teens. What?" I can think of plenty of games where we lost and I came out of the game saying, "Um, if every one of the passes we threw at the goalline had been a generic running play instead, we'd have settled for fewer FGs and won. What?"
Added to which: the people who hate, hate, hate our coaches are largely the same people who want us to become a high-flying passing offense. And yet, when people criticize our coaches or praise other teams' coaches, they claim to want coaches who adapt to use the kind of players they have instead of forcing their system on the wrong players. But we spent 3 1st rounders on the o-line, two of which were interior road-graders, and we spent a top 5 pick on a RB even though the NFL is a passing league and RBs grow on trees. We have zero high picks at TE. We have 1 good high pick at WR. Given that that's the way we've constructed our roster, it can be said that a coach would be wisely adapting to our roster if they ran more, not less. Yet people want us to be the Greatest Show on Turf with a roster built to run an old-school Marty Schottenheimer offense.
