I see the logic in reducing to a brigade-based structure. I foresee a mini-corps type organization with 3-6 combat brigades under a corps headquarters with a logistics brigade, an artillery brigade, an aviation brigade and small brigades of engineers, signals, intelligence, MPs, etc.
But why doesn't the US Army rename their new brigade combat teams after their famous divisions? All the new brigades could be renamed after their former divisions, wear the division patch and take on the division history, ie. 1st Infantry Brigade "The Big Red One". This could allow the US Army to bring back the history of all the famous division's rather than just the 10 Regular and 8 National Guard that exist today. The British did this years ago. The 7th Armoured Division "Desert Rats" became the 7th Armoured Brigade tpday, etc.
I'm also curious why the new brigades only have two combat battalions and a cavalry squadron. Why not stick with three? With only two the brigade will have no reserve to conduct exploiting or flanking missions unless it fights in a one up one back formation. What's the point in a brigade that can only committ one battalion at a time? Why not organize all the brigades like the Stryker BCT with three combat battalions and a cavalry squadron?