My opinion about Chancellor Mark Wrighton is no secret. He has done a tremendous amount of work raising Washington University’s endowment and national prestige. Chosen as chancellor at the relatively young age of 46, his successes can be partially attributed to his youthful viewpoint at the time of his appointment. It allowed him to better adapt to the changing landscape of higher education when compared to his older peers. But he is not a young man anymore. He has lost his advantage.

After Wrighton announced his retirement a few weeks ago, I think his most likely successor is current Provost Holden Thorp, a former chancellor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Based on his past experience, I think that, if Thorp is to succeed Wrighton, the University will continue to be in national headlines for the wrong reasons. Provost Thorp stepped down as chancellor at UNC in 2013, after the discovery of rampant academic and monetary fraud that occurred under his watch. For these (among other) reasons, he is the physical embodiment of mediocre people failing their way into prestige—and the least inspiring choice to lead Wash. U. to further success.

The NCAA recently cleared UNC—and by extension, Thorp himself—of all charges stemming from violations concerning classes that allowed college athletes to receive high grades for elementary school level work. This was cleared on a technicality, as the classes were not exclusively offered to student athletes, but those athletes were directed toward these classes because the administration, led by Thorp, set the precedent. These young students’ educations were not as important as the free labor they provided toward the bottom line of the university. Thorp officially left the chancellorship June 30, 2013 and was installed as provost at Wash. U. on July 1, 2013. In case you’re counting at home, there was no gap in employment status. After being caught subverting the rules and exploiting these vulnerable students’ lives for money, he was allowed to miraculously remove himself from the situation by accepting another high-level position at an even wealthier university. This move undoubtedly seems orchestrated by two chancellors who obtained their positions at similar ages (43 and 46-years-old) while both holding a Ph.D. in chemistry from the California Institute of Technology and both working under the same mentor, Professor Harry B. Gray. In short, it sure seems like Wrighton did his friend a solid by getting him a job after he s— the bed at his old one.

Over the last few years, several groups in the Wash.U. community have made serious attempts to unionize in order to secure a better life while working at the University. The students, formally known as teaching assistants, want to vote soon but are being met with the full weight of the administration. There are valid reasons for and against a union, but the choice should remain to the group voting without outside interference. Reasonable, right? Apparently not to the upper levels of the administration. The University’s anti-union push is being spearheaded by, you guessed it, the second worst Holden in American history (Caulfield has a slight lead).

When confronted by questions about unionization efforts, he plays dumb, acts innocent and really lays into the Southern geniality he picked up in North Carolina. There is a Facebook video posted by graduate students, meeting with Thorp and graduate school Dean William Tate, and asking questions about their anti-union stance and the various scare tactics they have employed. Thorp never fully addresses the questions, making it someone else’s responsibility to answer. One prime example: When asked how much the very expensive anti-union law firms employed by the University are being paid (presumably with our tuition dollars), he says “I have no idea how much we’re paying. I don’t control the legal budget.” Are you telling me the second highest-ranked person at the University has no clue how much of his students’ tuition payment is being used against those very same students? To me, this means one of three things: either he’s lying, really bad at his job or just plain dumb. I’ll let you decide which works for you.

Since 1858, Washington University has only been led by white guys. I had to clutch my pearls when I realized the leadership of the University I call home was less diverse than almost every other university at the same level. Harvard University has had a female president. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has a female president. Yale University and the University of Chicago had their first female president in the 70s (Dr. Hanna Gray was the first at both schools—bada–, personified). But not here. Is that really surprising for a school that was shamed on a national scale about the monumental lack of non white students entering the University? This campus, the same one that wants to be recognized as a national leader in higher education, has never strayed from its formula for leadership. Real, dynamic change comes from bucking tradition and setting trends. Holden Thorp is not only the same as every previous chancellor but has an added bonus of a track record that places his supreme lack of transformative leadership at the forefront. The pungent stench of the wealthy living life by a different set of rules burns your senses when you learn about the worst Holden to walk the planet (I decided to move him up because he does real damage).

The next chancellor will have a tougher job than any predecessor. The speed and volume at which information flows, coupled with the increasingly divisive fight for equality, will be major factors determining success. Thorp has never inspired those he leads, has never used his position for the betterment of society and has never indicated that he cares about more than himself. It is an embarrassment that he has any position here—and the sooner he leaves, the better off we’ll be.