Theres one HUGE flaw in that entire rambling pile of twaddle. They've basically summed up the idea that the magic and interest in the cup, is only in a underdog beating a premier league side. Which is often crap, firstly a lot of the big cup upsets are usually when a woefully understrength premiership team, or a about to be relegated one puts in a performance so bad, a slightly less bad performance manages to beat them. Half the cup upsets, actually make for horrific viewing.
Likewise, Carling Cup is one thing, but I don't think Stoke, Blackburn or Spurs will "not particularly care about" the FA cup. I think all three of those will be very enthusiastic about winning, and City are without question looking for silverware of any shape or form this year, being this is their biggest chance, they'll be going balls out, and have provided a lot of very good to watch attractive football, against good and bad sides.
Theres also another thing they failed to mention, afaik a decent share of the TV money gets spread around to all fixtures, not just those shown live. However the bigger games get higher ratings, meaning when it comes to negotiating the contract, the contract is worth more money, and the smaller teams get a bigger wedge of cash, even when they aren't on TV.
The real question they should be asking is, with millions of viewers around the world, watching streams of multiple matches every weekend, when are the powers that be and clubs going to get together, make all games available, let the fans pick what game they want to watch, and make a huge amount of extra cash in the process?