Sankey and The Blunder in Birmingham

LSU gave Greg Sankey exactly what the SEC said it wanted: on September 4, Wade Rousse notified him that LSU would not roster Wright and Harris. The rule had been established, the penalties were in place, and LSU had complied. Sankey won.

At that moment, Sankey had an opportunity to end the entire controversy on the strongest possible note. He could have issued a statement saying, in effect: The SEC stood firm, its member institutions adopted the rule, LSU complied, and the conference’s rules prevailed.

That would have been a decisive victory for the SEC and a powerful demonstration of Sankey’s leadership. He could have closed the book and moved forward with the conference stronger than before.

Instead, Sankey kept going.

He turned a compliance victory into a federal lawsuit, accusations of “lack of institutional control,” and an effort to put LSU’s membership in the SEC on the line. He went nuclear based on emotions. And he did it after LSU had already removed the very conduct the new rule was designed to prohibit.

Sankey had the opportunity to show tremendous leadership and he Failed.

The objective had been achieved, but the victory apparently wasn’t enough. The fight continued, the rhetoric escalated, and Sankey ultimately put himself in the position of having to justify punishing LSU for a rule violation LSU did not commit.

Sankey had the strongest possible ending on September 4: LSU complied and the SEC rules prevailed. Instead of taking the win, he chose escalation. Now, after taking the fight all the way to Birmingham, he has to explain why the SEC should punish LSU when LSU ultimately did exactly what the SEC demanded.

He took a position of strength and turned it into a position of weakness. For himself and the SEC.