Nobody is "forcing" RSNs on you. You can just subscribe to those in your viewing area. The reason we want the channel is to watch the games live. No sports fan says, "I'll just skip the game so I can watch 30 seconds of it tonight on the news."
Satracer's earlier comments have crystalized D*'s position for me. They are upset that Dish did an end-run and got a deal that fit their pricing model which included on-site advertising to help keep the cost per sub in line. Since then DirecTV has taken the schoolyard view and by saying "if we don't get (the ridiculous non-starter) the deal we want (such as we have with Fox Soccer+), then we're taking all our marbles, going home, and won't play." How childish. Why would the PAC-12 Net agree to a pay-per-view model for one carrier, but not for any others. That makes no marketing and business sense from it's point-of-view. That's an empty promise without any financial or viewer commitment on D's part and that would not sway any additional advertiser to place its product on the PAC-12 Net.
Full disclouse: Even though I'd a D* sub since 1996, I do have access to the channel on-line via a sub through a vacation property elsewhere. But I want the channel offered to me from D*. I have no other alternative at my primary home as satellite TV is the only alternative, and I am in month 5 of a new two-year commitment.
Well, if I crystalized D*'s position for you, I did a bad job. #1, that's my position, not D*'s. #2, I disagree with almost everything in that paragraph...apparently I did a poor job of explaining my position if that led to that conclusion. I can't imagine D* being upset at all with whatever Dish does. They will do what they will do, that's their business. You could turn that same argument on its ear and say, "well DISH and AT&T and TWC have a deal so D* must now go do a deal to be on parity." The reality is, each company will do what makes sense for their customers, for their financial health, etc. What makes these decisions difficult is the diversity of the customers (sports fans vs non sports fans). D* has many customers that aren't sports fans that don't want their rates going up. There are some that have "crystalized" this position in this very thread. D*, in my opinion (I'm not a spokesman for the company, purely my opinion), has to weigh the impact on all their customers. They've offered a solution that will appease you and appease those that don't want the rate increase. Pac 12 said no. I get why the Pac 12 said no, I also get why D* is pushing back.
The world has changed significantly. Years ago when Big Ten launched, there was no cord shaving or cord cutting, bills were much less for customers, the economy wasn't hurting, etc, etc. If you're a non-sports fan and your bill just went up because of the Pac 12, Lakers, Dodgers, etc...are you more likely or less likely to look at alternatives? The world has changed. Strategies change, in my opinion. Costs of programming certainly have changed.