If you read the whole quote - even the parts you chose not to include - you see he calls it "technically" a run-pass option.
And that's my issue, what ark brought up: why are we calling a run play with the pass option being a conditional technicality? "There's only one 50/50 scenario on which we'll throw one pass to one route, and if that's covered we'll just turtle up and run up the middle like the rest of our run plays." 3rd and 5 is not a running down, especially with our run blocking. So throw a goddamn pass.
The biggest problem I have with our offensove gameplan is its over-conservatism. We play for FGs and field position in the hopes of winning FG-based slugfests. I know, I know. I secretly hate the Steelers so I'd ***** about whatever plays they actually called. But I hate that philosophy, especially when we have a bottom-tier defense that can't take advantage of field position and low-scoring games.