I didn't read the whole thing and only skimmed it a bit but my personal findings are that for resawing, going wider isn't necessarily all that it is cracked up to be.
Most who read my posts regarding bandsaw blades know that I really like my Lenox blades and really do not like my Timberwolf blades.
I do mostly resaw on my MM20 so that is where my experiences come into play.
I have a pricey carbide Trimaster that is 1" wide, 1/16" kerf, 2/3 variable pitch and I have a less pricey bimetal Diemaster2 that is 1/2" wide, ~0.032" kerf, 6 tpi, hook style.
From a pure resaw point of view, these two blades perform nearly identical for me. The nod goes to the Trimaster for a slightly smoother cut but at a larger kerf. The Diemaster2 has just a slightly rougher cut but has half the kerf.
Honestly, I'm not sure which give me the most veneers from a plank of wood. The smoother cut will require less passes through the drum sander but it eats up 2x more wood in its kerf. The rough cut requires more passes through the drum sander even though its kerf is smaller. BUT, the rough cut requires cutting a slightly thicker veneer to sand down. I tend to like my veneers a tad on the thicker side at 1/16".
Frankly, I think it is a wash until you compare the COST of the two blades: The Diemaster2 is 20% the cost of the Trimaster. The Trimaster will likely outlast the bimetal but I gotta tell you, I'm quite impressed with how sharp the Diemaster2 has stayed and it has gnawed through a couple 100 bf of walnut in its life so far. I tend to leave the Diemaster2 on my BS as it has become more or less my general purpose blade.
I also want to say that I have a Lenox WoodmasterCT carbide blade. It is 1" wide, 0.051" kerf and the pitch is like 1.3 tpi or something. While I expected a rough cut from this blade, it was too rough for my liking and not conducive to my quest at yielding maximum veneers from a plank. It sits quietly on my wall...all 14' off it.