I'd like to see someone who knows and can articulate more detail spend some time explaining the "formula" for how these priests operated that purportedly not a single cleric is able to get right today. I'm hearing that the biggest difference is a focus on the Faith and an avoidance of the "hot topics" of sedevacantism, BOD, etc, but is this true? Did they not discuss these topics? Or, is the "formula" to discuss them but not hold a strong opinion one way or other? I know very little about these priests. Did they work with others or were they entirely independent?
.
If Wessex admires them and sees nothing of them in the Traditional priests today, he should have spent much more time talking about how they operated so as to spread these ideas.
.
What Pax Vobis explained about not changing and compromising with the times I think only really applies to the SSPX.

.
I think you're right on target, MD, in that Wessex did not speak in detail about how Fr. DePauw or Fr. Wathen operated.  But now that he's banned, he won't have the chance to, no? What if he had been questioned about that "before it was too late" for him (however that gets decided is anyone's guess). Or JPaul for that matter!
.
As for changing and compromising with the times, it seems to me the SSPX is FAR from alone. It's all over the place.
But if you ask the present seminarians of the SSPX about their formation, they have a neatly packaged reply.
No doubt they have been taught to say this to all comers who question them:
"Some claim they study the Summa and that makes their formation formidable. But WE are LIVING the Summa."
.
Well, maybe they're being taught to SAY they're "living the Summa" but see what happens when you ask for examples.
.
I don't think there is any group in existence that is immune from this problem. 
It creeps in via different avenues but creep in it does.
.
Especially now that practically all the traditional methods of running seminaries have been abandoned one way or another.
Even those attempting to keep the old ways alive are leaving out huge swaths of essential factors just because it's too much.
Some leave out this others leave out that, and nobody makes it clear to applicants or supporters what they leave out.
It's a big secret.
You have to talk to the seminarians who went there and then left or were kicked out before you get a good picture of it.
One would have to be a very dedicated layman to be on top of these issues.