re: Who’s Happy with Losing?

quote:

---

So it's VERY likely LSU football would not have suffered much. Even if Wade were retained.

---

I agree with this. I never said that I personally thought football would suffer, just that administration did. I made a post about this a while back, but I think one of Tate's biggest agendas is cleaning up the image of the university.

Plenty of negative articles about Wade were circulating and his Wikipedia page mentioned in the first paragraph that he was under FBI investigation. Tate's the type of president to not allow the university to be displayed in a negative way. In his eyes, Wade always had to go and the NOA was the perfect impetus for that. I always viewed Wade's tenure as one that existed on borrowed time. I wasn't surprised in the slightest when he was fired.

That's why we see the hires of Kelly and McMahon- more level headed CEO types than the boisterous Orgeron and Wade. Not to mention, I just think Tate and Woody flat out didn't like Wade because he wasn't their guy, and they weren't gonna take a bullet for him.