It is going to be what the B12 can garner for themselves ('23-'25 period) vs what any of the individual B12 schools may do in negotiating with any of the other 4 Power conferences.
Will not having a conference network still be a big issue then, and having residual resentment of the LHN will be sustained?
If the OU-oSu combo gets another power conference offer,
and current dynamics remain similar, I expect those two go together. Texas leaving is more complex because they will have demands. Some of it could be new and unexpected. The BIG and the SEC are not conferences to bend their norms. The BIG expects newbies to go through several years of reduced disbursements before fully incorporated financially.
WVU will go if they get a power offer closer to home. I am not dismissing WVU as a SEC selection, but believe the ACC would be the better logistical and need fit.
KSU, ISU, TCU, and TTU, would be more circumstantial selections, depending on the power conference making the offer and who are the lead school(s). For example, Texas Tech would generate little to no interest by the BIG, but could be fundamental in a PAC12 package expansion.
I suppose where I divert most from some of you guys is when you start advocating 18, 20, or 22 member conferences. OK, one recognizes forthcoming streaming properties; however, the traditional criteria of fitness and synthesizing doesn't disappear.
My experiences in academia, inclusive of engagements with athletics as it relates to admissions and recruitment, activities, remediation programs, counseling and advising and instruction, on a couple of levels; I want to emphasize travel factors do matter. So does class time for student athletes. I've seen women's field hockey teams, for example, travel 700 miles and back in a few vans in a two day period. Such similar circumstances applies to every Olympic-style sport in most places. Contrary to some beliefs, the BIG, SEC, etc., don't just jet all Olympic-style teams all over the country.