The argument about cheating being accepted in the SEC is based on the fact the schools are so demographically similar and so closely located to each other. For many kids, going to school at Tennessee is no different than UGA, Fla, Auburn, etc. The schools have have different traditions, but they unquestioningly are of a monolithic culture. In order to get athletics recruits to choose one of three (or more) essentially identical options, money is introduced into the equation.
Not all schools are essentially indistinguishable from almost every other school in their conference. Texas is sufficiently different from A&M, OU, Baylor, Tech, etc, that Texas doesn't necessarily have to cheat, or cut corners in other manners. My argument has long been that A&M's differentiators act as a negative in recruiting, and therefore A&M has long had to offer indu ents such as money, not having to attend classes, no drug testing, no suspensions for arrests, etc.
There unquestionably have been some overzealous UT boosters in the past, but the differentiators of the UT Austin athletics programs are sufficient enough to sway most student-athletes who would fit well within the UT culture. If they don't get "it" and essentially want to be paid from Day 1 at UT, they are going to be more drama than they will ever be worth, and won't fit in on the UT campus.