Huh? I thought the Dodgers-Fox deal was already in place?

Fox had exclusive negotiating rights through... end of autumn, about. But once that deadline passed, the TV rights were on the market.

Someone explain to me what each of these two Time Warner channels would show out of season. Based upon MASN, I'm guessing the Dodger channel would show plenty of low-level college conferences (assuming Fox has already snapped up Pac-12 tier rights). Lots of Mountain West, WCAC and Big West action...go Anteaters!

Fox lost the Pac-12 rights when the Pac-12 created their own network.

So, this is about creative accounting? I too was surprised about the Time Warner talk, as I thought the Fox deal was all but done. When googling to find out what happened there, I came across this article talking about how the Dodgers were trying to structure the deal so MLB would take less money for revenue sharing.

Forbes reported that one possible scenario would have the Dodgers and Fox joining together to create the regional sports network. Fox would handle the money (ad sales) and pay the team the $84 million annual rights fee, plus the annual increases, but also would pay a guaranteed dividend of $100 million a year. It is that bonus payment that the Dodgers and baseball are at odds over, say sources. MLB argues that the payment is part of the TV revenue and therefore is subject to profit sharing. But the team believes it is a payment for the risk the owners took when they bought the team and that the payments could vary along with the value of the team, so MLB should not be able to claim it.

Would an a-la-carte pricing model be cheaper for most people?

The article gives the example of the Disney Channel being $1 per subscriber, but it would have to be higher on an a la carte model. I would guess most households think they watch a lot of different channels.