Practically speaking, after you've signed with UT, or for that matter, have offers from good schools, how much of a "reward" is getting on TV? What more can getting your HS game on TV do for you? It seems to me that it would be far more "rewarding" or beneficial for those who need offers or want to get offers from better schools.
This is not so much about recruting advantages as it is about a long-standing policy: Colleges cannot publicly comment on recruits until they are signed.
What started this latest ruckus were the public comments of Dave Brown from ESPN/LHN who stated the LHN intended to televise the games this fall of two unsigned committed recruits, Jonathan Gray and Conner Brewer. Those two will not sign until Signing Day next February or March. The LHN is an institutional network of UT and should not be televising or commenting on unsigned recruits of UT.
Also, too many here are downplaying the recruiting advantages. What if there is an uncommitted hotshot QB that UT is recruiting along with A&M and OU who is now a junior and the LHN approaches the kid or school about televising one or two of his games on the LONGHORN Network and pays the school a huge sum to do so. That is a definitely a recruiting advantage as long as A&M and OU don't have a network or monetary resources like UT's.
Bottom line is this, institutional networks should not be televising HS sports of any kind whether it is the LHN, Aggie Network, CTN, BTN or the new P12 network. ESPN has other avenues like ESPNU to televise HS sports without opening up a huge can of worms for the NCAA. In Iowa, leave HS games to Mediacom not some ISU network. It's a no brainer IMO.