>

There are certainly differences, but the political calculus is still the same. A failed speakership vote where the outcome is all but concluded shows weakness in the party. Boebert is an example for people who are on the far right, so they are likely realizing they need to "reign in" the extremism after the "disappointing" midterm results.
Talk is easy, action isn't. We'll see tomorrow, but failing the vote isn't likely to win anyone friends and does little to enact any change.
People said the same thing about Pelosi, that a few far left Congresspersons would hold out on the first ballot or two. They didn't, as that kind of gamesmanship is bad for your party. We're likely in the same position here. The GOP knows that McCarthy will get it, and any games just weakens your own party  at this point. >

Do you mean in the 2019 or 2021 Speaker Election? The 2019 speaker election was a pretty different scenario because Dems had a substantially greater majority. The 2021 election was different because of the incumbency advantage among other factors. Also, I don't remember those elections too well, but I remember that progressives seemed to indicate they wouldn't support her at some point, but not 2 days before the election like Republican firebrands are doing. 
While it may hurt the party for Republicans to vote against McCarthy, members of the freedom caucus have largely taken the position that they oppose both establishment parties. And the games the freedom caucus have played have resulted in the ouster of the last two Republican speakers.