Oh boy! A topic I feel competent in (there aren't many), it's FRIDAY, and I just finished a bunch of very distasteful bureaucratic paperwork, so am in a good mood!
Re the posts about the energy: It may or may not be true that the bigger tire will absorb more energy from the airplane upon touchdown - that is, how much of the linear kinetic energy of the airplane is converted to rotational kinetic energy of the tire/wheel. It depends on how the mass of the tire varies with its loaded radius, and on the mass distribution. Both are unknowns here.
The rotational kinetic energy for different size wheels varies as 1/2 times the moment of inertia of the wheel times its angular velocity (related to RPM) squared. But for a given forward speed its angular velocity is inversely proportional to its loaded radius. Grossly simplifying, the tire/wheel assemblies will have a mass ratio roughly proportional to their diameter ratios, crudely assuming most of the mass is in the tread face of the tire. Now, moment of inertia is mr^2, so the ratio of moments of inertia will be as the ratio of their radii cubed (mass varies as r and I as r^2). Now, the angular velocity is proportional to v/r where v is the airplane's velocity and r is the loaded tire radius. so now we've got kinetic energy of the tire assembly roughly proportional to tire radius squared for a given linear velocity of the airplane.
HOWEVER that only has to do with initially spinning up the tire (and explains why the plane will lurch a little bit more on touchdown with the bigger tires). BUT the plane isn't stopped yet - the wheel needs to stop rotating when the plane stops. So the rotational kinetic energy of the wheel, as well as what's left of the linear kinetic energy of the plane, must also be converted to heat by the brakes.
In fact, it gets worse. A little bit of energy is dissipated by the wheel bearings. The larger wheel spins slower than a smaller wheel. Therefore the frictional energy loss in the wheel bearings is less for the large tire. This is a tiny difference, but it's there. So more of the total energy of the plane is dissipated in the brakes (as compared to other mechanisms) with the larger tires.
Bottom line - - Bob's right. No net savings in braking ENERGY for larger tires. But the braking energy only matters in terms of the heat dissipation capability of the brake system, not the braking force that must be applied to the pads.
As to adequacy of braking force, other posters who have said that the distance from ground to axle centerline is what matters, they're correct. The frictional force on the brake disk required for a given rate of deceleration is linearly proportional to that loaded radius.
Like I said, I'm more in a good mood right now than an intensely technical mood, so somebody may point out error(s) in the above. Fun stuff.