My opinion on where things stand, if anybody happens to care...
The media (and the Pac-12) got a little ahead of themselves on the idea of the OU and OSU (plus the others) moving west. The longer things were allowed to simmer on, the more that the anti-expansionists out west were allowed to gain traction, enough so that there's some pause by some of those who care about academics to add the schools.
As far as Oklahoma's statement today - I don't think they let that sort of information out if there wasn't still a chance that they stay. There's a bit of conjecture that this is a parting shot to the Big 12/Beebe, and while it might be, it really serves no purpose. There's no reason for them to do that if they are Pac-12 bound. Doesn't mean that they aren't, but it goes more along with the reasoning that they are using the Pac-12 as leverage to achieve what they want in the Big 12. Now, we wait to see if Texas capitulates. Who knows if they do.
As far as Missouri's Board of Curators meeting tomorrow and the informal SEC invite. I don't doubt they've had discussions with the SEC. We've had discussions with the Big East. They SHOULD be having discussions with the SEC. And, to that end, I'm willing to bet tomorrow Deaton is empowered to make conference decisions. It's being proactive. Our BOR doesn't have to do that, as Geoffrey already retains that power. I don't think Missouri is ready to jump yet at the SEC. It'd be a different story if it was a Big Ten offer out there, but it's not. Again, they could, but not until after the Big 12 were to collapse. They wouldn't put themselves at the risk of even a reconstituted Big 12 making them pay up. Call me naive, but I think Mizzou still wants the Big 12 to work. I also believe that they will indeed go to the SEC should the Big 12 collapse, and that they do have an informal agreement place for that. The SEC is their parachute, IMO.
A&M is gone.
Eyes need to look towards Texas now, to see what happens, RE: Beebe and LHN demands.
