Actually, maybe not always true. The great UM offenses under Schnellenberger were designed to compensate for lack of physical superiority.
Howard said, when you don't have physical superiority, you can't win by "leaning." When you're physically inferior, you win by neutralizing the physical superiority of the defense.
All your OLs have to do is neutralize pass rushing DLs, you don't have to defeat them like you do playing power football with lots of running. Instead, the DL has to run like **** to get to the QB. In the meantime, it becomes a two-on-one battle, your QB and the WR versus the DB.
Howard described that as divide-and-conquer. That's how our pro passing attack managed to overcome many physically superior defenses.
Now, maybe that proves your point--it seems it results in one dimension. Ideally, Howard's offense sought to maintain a pass-run balance. When we sputtered in the OB against Nebraska in '84 BC game, Kosar said it was because we got out of pass run balance. If we're successful passing, that should help open up the run game.