How does one credibly make the argument that Missouri and Tennessee are lateral moves, "at best", when they have achieved demonstrably superior results both in the present and past? I agree that neither is a huge upgrade, but it's difficult to argue that they aren't lateral moves, at least, and slight upgrades in all probability. Conference affiliation doesn't mean much when you haven't been able to compete in your conference. No one would argue that Northwestern or Penn St. are better basketball jobs than Missouri or Tennessee, but Minnesota somehow is?
The way you phrase that last sentence you seam to say that minnesota penn state and northwestern are all about the same and minnesota can't be better than Tenn/Mizzou because these other big ten schools(NW/psu) arn't.