Not really. EA didn't choose not to release FIFA 14 out of spite is the reality of the matter.
There was clearly more money in 100,000 PS2 sales (re-releasing the same game for the 3rd or 4th time) than there would have been in whatever the Wii U version of FIFA 14 shifted. There's also the thing of Wii U owners who really really needed the latest teams, were about to use the backwards compatability to continue to play the current teams.
However, note that they also no longer release the PS2 version. 3DS and Vita will be the next versions to get axed. Oh and Wii, if that's getting a 2015 release.
Are you really saying that PS2 owners would have bought yet another reskinned version (there's no sign that they even did that, by the way - VGChartz doesn't even have any numbers for the PS2 version of Fifa 13 or 14, suggesting it didn't even sell well enough to register), but Wii U owners wouldn't?
I find it funny that you suggest that they kept selling the PS2 version despite its dramatic plummet in sales, yet they couldn't do the same thing for Wii U, for which it was nothing but a launch title lacking in features.
"EA didn't choose not to release FIFA 14 out of spite is the reality of the matter" is something you have to back up, at this point. EA announced Mass Effect Trilogy just a couple of months before release of the Wii U, thus sabotaging Mass Effect 3 on the system. They announced major new innovations in Madden and Fifa, and then announced that the Wii U versions wouldn't get those innovations (and review scores for Fifa were around 90 for PS3/360, and around 70 for Wii U - think about that). They delayed only the Wii U version of Need for Speed, and announced before its release that it was going to be EA's last title (I give props to the devs for putting so much effort into the game, but EA themselves sent it to die).
As your own argument has pointed out, EA doesn't shy away from just releasing reskinned versions of their sports games for systems where the games are less popular. Chicken-and-egg issues aside, there is no reason why EA couldn't have continued this trend with Wii U. But they didn't. No rational businessperson would assert that performance of a single instance of a title, that was lacking in features and released late, would be indicative of long-term trends. But EA cut off all support well before they could even know how their titles would perform.
You don't just have to explain them ceasing support for Fifa titles. You have to explain their nonexistant support from the launch of the system onwards. They couldn't possibly have known before end of 2012 how Wii U sales would go, and yet they'd already cancelled all of their later titles for the system. Or they hadn't been developing them in the first place... which has the same effect.
Anyway, back to the actual topic... I think that there are mixed messages going on. Activision refuses to announce CoD:AW for Wii U, but releases an update to Black Ops 2 adding a new map and hinting at another one? Announcing that Skylanders Wii would include a code for Skylanders Wii U? They finally release the map they promised for Ghosts? Capcom don't announce RE1 Remaster for Wii U, but they're pumping Mega Man onto the VC like there's no tomorrow? Even EA, despite having cut off all support for Wii U, insists on denying the suggestion that Nintendo are "dead to them", and keep repeating that Nintendo is "a great partner", etc. And then there's cases like Bandai Namco announcing a title for release on PS3 and Wii U only.