This is more about responding to the comment you agreed with,
There have always been 2 schools of thought about the pros and cons of being in play flexible or the benefits of specific route running.
In other words, there are those who believe that instead of making a play so complicated and hoping both the QB and receiver are on the same page, and those who believe that if the QB and receiver run the exact route over and over again, the execution of the play is more likely to be more consistent. Take Johnny Unitas and Ray Berry. every time the Colts needed a first down throw, they'd throw that 12 yard out to Berry. Everyone knew they were going to do it, but their execution was SO precise that they completed most of the time anyway. Maybe we would get more out of our WR's if they always knew exactly where they were going. They might run their routes quicker and more assurance if they mostly knew where they were going at the snap of the ball, instead of having to read the post-snap defense and figure out where he's supposed to go, on the fly.
Tony Dungy consistent success with his Tampa 2 alignment believing that the more times his players saw the game from the same position the better they would be able to defend it,
I'm not saying one way is better than the other but consistent repetition is a good way to get better. Seems like every year teams go more and more to the "muddle" alignment for the front 7 and it's been very effective across the league. (BTW another BB innovation)
Personally, I believe, because Mayo and most of his WR's are so young, might be better off not using a lot of option route schemes and concentrate on his execution and accuracy in the short term and THEN go to the options stuff once he "knows more of the answers to the test"