Bear in mind that this does not discount all possible forms of supersymmetry, but from the sounds of it, the forms that people were placing a certain amount of stock in: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14680570

The article said:

According to Professor Jordan Nash of Imperial College London, who is working on one of the LHC's experiments, researchers could have seen some evidence of supersymmetry by now.

"The fact that we haven't seen any evidence of it tells us that either our understanding of it is incomplete, or it's a little different to what we thought - or maybe it doesn't exist at all," he said.

I was intrigued that even George Smoot weighed in on the naysay side:

The article said:

And the new generation has the backing of an old hand - Professor George Smoot, Nobel prizewinner for his work on the cosmic microwave background and one of the world's most respected physicists.

"Supersymmetry is an extremely beautiful model," he said.

"It's got symmetry, it's super and it's been taught in Europe for decades as the correct model because it is so beautiful; but there's no experimental data to say that it is correct."

If really might be a way for younger theorists to make their mark. I know there are a few spin foam hypotheses out there, but who knows what else they could come up with?

We wouldn't have known any of this without the likes of the Tevatron and LHC. Are you listening, Congress?