The big player in keeping the conference together is OU and not Missouri. The question is whether OU is satisfied with those concessions. TAM probably left because the announcement of the high school games opened up the irritating scab that they were second fiddle in Texas. They never liked the deal Texas made with ESPN in starting the LHN and that was reignited with the announcement of broadcasting high school games. So they used it as an excuse to get out (in their minds) from under Texas's dominance. It was always about Texas envy.
The rest of the conference may not have liked those high school broadcasts but as you and others have stated, Texas does not gain additional recruiting advantages with those broadcasts. The only real value for Texas with these broadcasts is revenue.
Letting in another Texas team was a preference for everyone, including Texas, vs. inviting teams geographically far from each university. It was a smart move but not the move that is necessary to placate OU imo.
The real issue is what Missouri has expressed. How committed is Texas to staying in a conference. Everyone in the B12 is viewing Texas as ND II. Notre Dame does not need conferences for football. They have a sweetheart arrangement with NBC. Now Texas has a sweetheart deal with ESPN. The only thing keeping Texas from going independently immediately is that cable and satellite companies have not signed deals to distribute the LHN network. Once that happens they won't need a conference for football, any more than Notre Dame needs a conference for football. They might even be able to stay independent in bb as well.
Notre Dame is doing quite well even as its football program is struggling to stay in the top tier of football programs. Texas on the other hand is at the top of the heap. So it will be able to use the Notre Dame model for quite some time.
People in many threads have pointed to the disadvantages with having Notre Dame in the BE conference. ND brings their name and following to all the sports except football, but the absence of their presence in football was very destabilizing to the football schools in the BE.
I'm sure there are more than a few OU people who are as concerned about something like this taking place in the B12 with Texas. Missouri has expressed this concern. IMO, OU is hoping Missouri's threat to leave the conference over this issue of 13 years vs. 6 years is enough to get Texas to agree. They would prefer having Missouri be the villain over this issue and keep their relationship with Texas on friendly terms. After all, if they stay partners with Texas they can ride Texas's coat tails. When they agreed to go to the PAC with Texas, they took advantage of this relationship. Imo they had hoped the PAC could get Texas to make LHN concessions. That obviously failed.
So OU has to hope Missouri gets Texas to move on the 13 year agreement. Otherwise they are left with the difficult decision of making a move now or waiting 6 years for the conference to destruct. And waiting 6 years could result in OU being in a less favorable situation than it is today, with regards to options.
It is my belief that the B12 has less leverage than the PAC in getting Texas to change its position. The only thing in the B12's favor is that Texas has learned that it can't park itself anywhere that is decent for the short time period needed for LHN to get those outlet contracts and subscribers. But Texas will call Missouri and OU's bluff. They can afford to. Even if Missouri, OU and OSU leave, Texas knows it can get a lot of teams in the midwest to join the conference or it could get part of, or all of, the BE football teams to temporarily bandage the B12 conference. There are enough prostitutes to fill Texas's needs. They don't need supermodels for now.
