So when a shale layer is great in extent it implies an underlying wide continental shelf, such as the one off our east coast?
Remember this wonderful diagram you posted
here:
Now consider that the upper-left to lower-right dimension may be (say) 1000 miles, while the vertical dimension might be (say) 1000 feet.
You're getting substantial areas of sands, muds, and carbonates - But at any time, the depositional areas of each are considerably smaller. The sands at the lower-right were deposited much (maybe many millions of years) earlier than the sands of the uppper-left. Note the difference between the chronostratigraphic correlation and the lithostratigraphic correlation in the rock columns at the lower-left.
Having a huge area of sandstone does not necessarily mean that you had a huge simultaneous area of sand deposition. On the other hand, you might have a huge area of sand that indeed was a huge simultaneous area of aeolian sand deposition, as discussed by roxrkool
here.
And remember, the above is a diagram that approximates reality. Beware of taking it too literally.
Moose