Conference networks are the way to go to make up revenue. I'm not sure if Texas BY ITSELF would be able to get any newly created Pac 12 network in Texas for the REVENUE that they want. Texas has a huge state and national following. I'm sure the Pac 10 would have done their homework in order to determine this. If the Big 12 loses the state of Texas, they are in big trouble as they lose 33% of the conferences TV sets. They would only have KC, St. Louis and possibly Denver (if TA&M is invited over Colorado) as big media markets.
They wouldn't lose 33% of their TV sets. Those same sets would still get the Big 12 programming because of A&M, Tech and Baylor. A&M has the seventh-largest enrollment in the US. Which means their fans are in Houston and Dallas.
The Big XII's problem would be that the national networks wouldn't give them as much money without the draw of UT. No Red River shootout. No Texas-Texas A&M game. No Texas-Kansas in hoops. That's going to hurt the TV deal significantly.
Which is why the Pac 10 would offer Texas in the first place. Texas could probably make more money in the Pac-12. Their TV deal is up and they could use Texas to get a much bigger pay day than what the Pac 10 and Big 12 are currently getting. They could form their own network with the ACC for the non-national games and make more money there, too. (and having 12 in each conference would help negotiations between the ACC/Pac10 to make it happen).
Texas, financially and academically, could easily be better off in the Pac-12 than Big XII... unless the politicians step in. To me, it's not really a question of "would they go?" but "can they go?"
Of course, it would take vision and planning on the Pac-10's part, which might be the biggest problem.
The more fascinating thing would be the Big XII's response.
Which is why I put the A&M comment in the last statement (if TA&M is invited over Colorado). JMO, if the Pac 10 would create a network, having UT and UTA&M would get their network on the state of Texas. I don't know if Texas - by itself - could get a Pac 10 network in the state of Texas at the same rate if they had BOTH Texas AND TA&M. That's the key.
Another point: The state of Texas has ~ 3X more TV households (TVHHs) than Colorado and Utah (6.8 million versus 2.4 million) for conference network TV purposes. So the key is Texas. The Pac 10 *could* still expand with Colorado and Utah, but the big money is in the state of Texas where lots of TV households are there for a newly created conference network.
Suppose with only Texas, the Pac 10 can get $0.35 per customer for a Pac 10 network * 12 months per year * 6.8 million TVHHs = 28.6 million. Add Colorado and they can charge the 'normal' $0.70 per month * 12 months * 1.6 million (Colorado) = 13.44 million
Total for UTexas and UColorado ~ $42 million
Now, add TA&M over Colorado and by doing that, a Pac10 network can charge $0.70 per customer in Texas = 57.1 million! If you assume 50% of that goes to the conference (like the Big 10), then you have ~ $28 million for the conference just from the state of Texas. Even if you bump it up from $0.35 to $0.60 per customer, you still get ~ $49 million rather than the $42 for Colorado and Texas.
As you can see, it depends on how much they can get in Texas with and without the Aggies for their Pac 10 network. TA&M also has the advantage of being a travel partner too which the Pac 10 seems to like.