Yep. I saved that text as I was passing through the article to say something along these lines.
To bend over backwards for the article anyway, there may be some merit to the idea that “ Wings on an aircraft with rear-mounted engines can be simpler since they didn't have to support the extraneous weight.” —- but they left out the language: “when on the ground”!
Everything you say is right, and captures the driving concerns of the design much better. But perhaps there is some possibility of optimizing (the given overall rear engine design) a bit more for a no lift load case when the engines aren’t there on the wings because when producing no lift, you have no “dead load” to counterbalance with attendant stresses going opposite to what they do under lifting conditions. Eh? I know it’s a stretch.