Maybe dish can afford the pac12 because it doesn't carry the Lakers or any New York rsns. In fact they probably spend tons less on the set of pac 12 channels than DIRECTV does on the others. Pac12 is very important to dish strategically but because DIRECTV is so strong in places dish has no hope the pac12 is an after thought by comparison for DIRECTV.
Would I be happy if they agreed to the same deals that other carriers have agreed to for those networks, absolutely. Pac-12 is asking for the same rate and tier as they got from Dish and numerous cable companies. I think the (former) sports leader could/should pay for that. Obviously, you can't agree to any arbitrary rate that some idiot RSN throws out there (like the Dodgers channel or your hypothetical YES deal), but they don't have to. For new channels they can wait until the channel lowers their price enough that other companies are willing to set the true market worth, or overpay slightly with the same "best rate" clause that's standard in most of these contracts. That way you're only paying a major premium while the channel is exclusive to you. If any one else makes a cheaper deal, you get that deal too.
DirecTV's welcome to pick and choose whatever channels they want, but I still think attempting to please everyone will lead to pleasing no one.
These things are so far from black and white it's scary.
Think of it this way. DIRECTV is being asked to spend about $9 more a year or more to carry the same teams it carried two years ago. I they can have that by a buck and not carry a few if the games they use to that won't really cause Much problem for their bottom line then that's what they are going to do. And our bill went up 1.63 or so for rsns is all this year.
It's all jut ridiculous. I hope they never pick up The Dodgers channel Or the pac12 channel and I'm a big fan of both. But this has to stop.