But Mac's team IS the exception to what you're talking about, regardless of the quality of RB personnel. We're past the era where there must be a balance number of run attempts to pass attempts. Rather, a team needs to play to its strengths personnel-wise. IF you have top shelf WR's, you're taking touches away from them by giving the ball to ineffective RB's (by comparison). IF you have top shelf RB's, you don't take touches away from them by throwing to less effective WR's. Any way you look at it, our WR group in Mac's year was better than our RB group... as was the case with LSU in 2019. CKD is proving that this age-old philosophy of "balance" doesn't always hold up. What is true is that a team must have an ability to control clock to a degree - otherwise your defense is on the field a lot during games. This is the new age of college football.
I would note that there's two different but related things I am addressing. One is balance, making sure the team isn't one dimensional. The other is over-reliance on quarterback play. I believe the latter is the biggest concern. It is a great risk if you let your success or failure rest entirely on the shoulders of a single player.
Mind you, I think DeBoer and Grubb are actually attempting to address this, it's just that like Saban and the passing game, it just isn't their area of expertise. I am also not in agreement that DeBoer is proving this isn't a concern. Firstly, this system relies on excellent QB play but you won't always have that. He is 31-4 with Penix and Ty. We can both agree that's great. However, without them he's 21-10. I think we can both agree that's not good enough.
Also since you brought up LSU, they still were effective running the ball. They averaged 4.7 per rush and scored 32 rushing TDs. Alabama is averaging 3.7 and has 8 rushing TDs. It's not really comparable. But let's get into the other problem with this approach. If your QB is hurt or has a bad game, you in trouble. Let's see how this played out. Against Michigan, Penix was 27/51 for 255 yards with 1 TD and 2 INTs. They ran for an averaged of 2.3 while Michigan ran for an average of 8. That was not successful. It works for wins, but we're talking championships and it fell flat.
Now, you might counter that Washington lacked talent. Not that year. They had 13 6th year seniors, they had 13 5th year players, and they had 10 first round draft picks including 2 top 10. They were talented and experienced. They had as many draft picks as Alabama (which almost beat Michigan). Yet, they were utterly dominated, losing 34-13.
This is the weakness of over-reliance on QB play. It's also the difference in 2020, they had amazing QB play, but they also had a running back that could get it done as well. Along those lines, let's see the two starts that Tua and Bryce had in championship games: Tua was 22-34 for 295 yards, 2 TDs, 2 INTs. Young was 35-57 for 369 yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs.
All three lost by multiple scores! If you combine those three efforts, and mind you this is from 3 NFL starters you get this: 84/142, 919 yards, 4 TDs and 6 INTs. You'll note it wasn't that they were bad at passing so much so that once they become one dimensional they had to force things, resulting in more turnovers than touchdowns. This is the liability that over QB reliance creates, it requires excellent QB play against a defense playing the pass.
There are two exceptions in this QB-reliant window, the first was Hurts with Tua coming in as a backup. As I said before though it re-calibrated the offense. In fact, it resulted in an almost perfectly balanced offense. It was a good running team that was struggling to pass, Tua came in and fixed that and they came back and won. Then there was Mac, certainly not balanced, but it wasn't as overly QB reliant! Najee and the running game were still very effective. He had 1,466 yards in 13 games and 26 TDs! This kept defenses honest and this also meant that Alabama could still run when they needed to. Obviously that worked well.
So, long story short I'm not arguing that you shouldn't be good at passing. I'm just saying you shouldn't be bad at running... You need to have a good running (back) game developed or else it will almost certainly catch up to you.