The problem is this. Neither OU or Texas look like teams that will be serious national contenders in the near future. If the Big 12 has to depend on teams that went 8-5 and 6-7 respectively last season, they are in major trouble. The fact of the matter is that teams like Baylor, Oklahoma State, and TCU have just about caught up to OU and Texas. This means that the Big 12 will have to act like a conference, not just the "OU-Texas" conference. If this post season tourney turns out to be a popularity contest between the best teams in the 5 power conferences, the Big 12 is odd man out until either OU or Texas can improve their teams to the point of becoming serious challengers. I sure do not see that in the cards this season, or next.
The point that everyone is missing here is this. Why did the ACC decide to go along with the Big 12, and why is there no real objections by the other three conferences? The reason is obvious. By allowing Texas to pick the top two teams in their conference to have a playoff game, the others are also allowed to pick the top two teams in their conference, regardless of which division they happen to be in. It will not matter if they are in the same division or not. This gives the power 5 conferences much more power to determine who will be in their CC game. Why not just end "Divisional Play" and go to a schedule that allows one or two games between teams on a yearly basis and everything else on a rotating basis?