Andy, I know you don't read what I have to say. You may not listen to many people, but I am trying to give you a hot tip. There have been no Superbowl winners in the past ten years with highly skewed pass/run ratios.
Here are the facts: NFL teams run about a thousand plays a season. If you go over Superbowl winners and analyze the pass/run ratios, there are none (zero) that deviate more than approximately fifteen per cent from a 50/50 ratio.
Some teams have run more than passed and vice versa. However, there is a clear pattern that the word "balance" is unwaveringly a part of a winning formula.
I know, the offensive line has been injured and weak. However, just as the successful pass offense frees up the run, it works in reverse. Running helps your offensive linemen to go out and block someone rather than constantly fending off blitzing corners and linebackers and the linemen who are teeing off on the interior line.
The West Coast Offense has long been diagnosed by defenses. Linebackers have no problems covering the slot receivers since the quarterback is scrambling or on his back. Thank God for poor Mike Vick's scrambling abilities. Blitzes are very effective statistically if there are so few runs that linebackers just key on empty backfields. Running out of the shotgun has poorer results in general as well.
Anyway, now I've said it like so many people who are die - hard Eagles fans. Run the ball a little more. Just see what happens. All the Superbowl teams can't be wrong, can they? I thought winning was the idea.
At least Mike Vick has Kevlar and DeSean Jackson can run faster than anybody.