"my thinking on this is that the reason to choose lugs over Tig or Brazing is for strength."
That's the part that isn't true at all, and never would be. Every other industry from aircraft to nuke plants does not follow that principle. But even if it were true that lugs were quantifiably stronger, which it isn't, but let us say for fat people, or on a unit weight, or a monday, tigged bikes would only be weaker if they didn't beef some part of the joint up accordinly to make them equaly strong. How do they make tandem TIG bikes, or TIG cargo bikes.
There isn't any such thing as "stronger". It is always stronger in some regard, by weight or whatever, and the response to that is simply to adjust the structure. Even in today's litigation environment, with crap bikes, offered through cash rich companies like Walmart, or anyone else, there is no evidence of that strengthening. The pros who do the horrible Paris Rubais race, race on cheap TIG Cyclocross frames (some of them) because the vibe is better than their regular ride. Surely if strength was a problem they could get something other than TIG.
The only reason TIG bikes are looked down on is that they came later, and promised to, and did put the lug builders out of the picture. For a while people who never held a TIG torch made up fantastic reasons as to why TIG was inferior for strength and other reasons. It's all bogus.
Much of this argument no longer exists among pros who know the market is there for a variety of steel frames, and the more people making them the better for the overall industry. One of the few things that actually supports the existance of lugged bikes today is the widespread popularity of TIG steel bikes. Imagine how much easier it is to sell a lugged bike when people like Surly are selling tons of Tigged ones. If the whole industry had moved to Aluminum or carbon, it would depress further the credibility of steel frames of any kind.