Correlation is not causation. Why was the artificial limit of "under 15 attempts used"? Because there were definitely wins with only 15 attempts.

If a team was 218-0 when kneeling on the snap in the 2nd half does it mean that the team should kneel on every play in the 2nd half to assure winning? Equally logical to your assertion.

Attempting less than 15 runs in those 42 games did not cause the Saints to lose those games. Circumstances during the loss limited their favorable instances to choose the run versus the pass in those games.

As I pointed out, the Saints have lost 395 games when running the ball 15 or more times over that same period of time.

Once again, instead of repeatedly posting a totally meaningless 0-42 statistic, how about pointing out actual plays in the game where a rushing attempt would have been more logical than a passing attempt. If you could find four instances where we would have reached the magical 15 that would have guaranteed us the win it would be nice.

And why did the Bucs only attempt EIGHT carries against us this week? Because our defense limited their opportunities to run the ball successfully. Winston averaged 11.5 yards per carry. Why didn't they just have him carry it 15 times?