The NFL's newest craze is moving the football by air.

Spread formations are becoming as common as the I-formation was in the 1990s; passing is the most flashy way to run an offense.

Should it be for teams without elite quarterbacks?

To save you time and my fingers from the never-ending "elite signal-caller debate," here's my definitive list of today's elite quarterbacks: Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, and Eli Manning are among the quarterbacks.

There are eight Super Bowl rings. Since 2010, they've combined for 76 300-yard games. They're the top statistical producers at the quarterback position year after year, with a 3-to-1 touchdown-to-interception ratio and a 4,000-yard season looking easy.

Passing the football slope game is probably in these quarterbacks' best interests. They obviously balance out their prolific aerial attacks with the run, but they wisely choose to rely on their quarterbacks when it matters the most.

These players and teams are emblematic of the NFL's current passing renaissance.

However, just because that fab five has recently shred secondaries on their way to numerous records and world championships doesn't mean the rest of the league should do the same.

They have, however. This is precisely when the league should refrain from being so "copycat."

Has anyone noticed how the small group of what used to be "good" quarterbacks—you know, the signal-callers who came close to being elite but fell short—has morphed into a rather large faction of "average" gunslingers and game managers?

Let us be more specific.

Which teams are truly better off when they run the football, or simply run it more?

Philadelphia fans would like to see running back LeSean McCoy carry the ball more frequently. Forget about what appears to be a dynamic passing offense led by Michael Vick. When "Shady" gets at least 20 carries, the Eagles are 10-1 since his pro debut in 2009.