Well, that's typically true but requires that all the base level functionality has to be operating well for the first step, blocking being the most fundamental. Good offensive coaches adjust the strategy according to the talent and ability they have available. Have a mobile QB who's good at improvisation outside a standard pocket, move the pocket more and get the QB into space. Have deficiencies at OL, run a simpler blocking scheme and look for quick throws that allow the QB to get rid of the ball faster. Have a world class RB, run the ball a lot using different plays to utilize him as best you can. I note all these as there are specific examples I can think of for each that various HCs and OCs are using even this year.
Beyond that, if a DC schemes up a game plan that slows the one being used, altering the game plan to use the gaps/hole left by the DCs game plan is standard for great OCs. Take what the D gives you is a well known, over used term for a reason. Its accurate.
Problem for us is the Texas offense has had running issues for 2 years now, but it's gotten markedly worse this year. That's due to both not having a premier RB (no hate on Wisner as he is a very good college RB) and an OL that had difficulties with the more complex blocking scheme Sark deploys.
The biggest issue is Sark's consistent reliance on similar game plans, and an unwillingness to move away from them. He's predictable and many here often call series of plays he runs. Series of plays often. If we can do it, I assure you a college DC can too. Add on top of that refusing to simplify the blocking scheme and align to a plan which better fits the skill positions and OL is just not something Sark likes to do until absolutely forces. See MSU and OU game for examples.