Pac-12 revenue (including media revenue) has been growing, not shrinking and member distributions are up. Most of that growth is attributed to the Pac-12's media rights deal, which (at the time it was negotiated) was the biggest media rights deal of any conference.

Since that time (and using the Pac-12 deal as a baseline for their own negotiations) the other P5 conferences have negotiated their own, more profitable deals.

The Pac-12 Network is not "close to failing" and it hasn't been a poor revenue generator. To the contrary, it's paid the schools just like the original contract stipulated. Where it has fallen short is:

1. In exposure. As revenue from the network has stablized, the Pac-12 is realizing that exposure might be just as important as revenue. This article does a pretty good job addressing that issue
2. In revenue relative to other P5 conferences. This Pac-12 "deficit" we keep hearing about isn't a looming mountain of debt, threatening the Pac-12 with insolvency. It's an earnings deficit, relative to the other P5 conferences. It just means that the Pac-12 is earning less than the other P5 conferences

Also, the network negotiations were contingent upon the addition of the Denver and greater SLC markets. That makes the addition of Utah and Colorado a financial positive. And as stated earlier, network revenues are actually up. It would be hard to convincingly argue that Utah is dragging the network down, but if you have sources and can make the argument I'd love to hear it.

Finally, you ended by saying "lucky for you guys [the Pac-10 invite] happened in 2009," implying that I prefer the Utes. That's not the case. I graduated from BYU fairly recently, and cheer for the Cougars when Utah and BYU play. And Utah's Pac-10 invite came in 2010, with the first year of competition being 2011-12.

Get wrecked.