Interpretation is a key part of Joe Beale's post "Defense Wins Championships, Except When It Doesnt".
Saying "Defense wins Championships" is not the same as "The team with the best defense always wins." Is Joe equating those statements?
Saying "Defense wins championships" doesn't mean you don't need any offense, or that special teams are unimportant.
One might also say..
Running the ball wins championships.
Special Teams / Field position win championships.
Place-kicking wins championships.
Luck wins championships.
None is an absolute truth. And not completely wrong either.
Nevertheless, without defense, chances of winning are slim. OTOH, games can be won 2-0 with a safety. Or 3-0 with a recovered fumble & a FG. Or 6-0 on a pick six with missed kick. You can also win 2-0 on a bad call, or lose on a bad hike from center. Or your star cornerback slips on ice, and you can lose to M*gan, but I digress.
Football is not simple, and we wouldn't love it if it was. Despite the posts by Joe Beale and Freakonomics, there is a measure of truth in "Defense wins championships." If there weren't, Jim Tressel would not have won 7 Big Ten Championships and a National Championship at OSU, nor 4 Div I-AA Championships at YSU.
There are many Buckeye fans who think a better defense would have won at least one championship for Ohio State this past season. And maybe two.
But not in a vacuum.