Bird nailed it. I've been clear on my Dino view since joining the boards. I think Dino was treated wrongly from beginning to end. I think Wellman fucked up by not making Dino a one-year interim. I would have been fine letting Dino go and hiring a better coach. But given the hires I'd been happier to let Dino play out another few seasons and go from there. My only point was that the good fire/bad hire gets way to much blind acceptance on the boards. The AD's job is to have the best coach leading the program. Clearly that didn't happen post-Dino. It's asinine to then argue it was a good fire if we didn't improve our HC.
And a step further, as Bird points out, you have to look at the probability of success of the hire to justify the firing. Clearly Wellman botched that step. But even if there were a 99% chance of a better hire, if it didn't work out, in retrospect it still wasn't a "good" firing, as we were worse off. You can say you like the aggressiveness or the desire to get better or get someone better, whatever. But there's just no way to call it a good firing if you don't end up better off. Just nonsense.
ETA: There are a lot of folks on these boards that let their dislike or lack of respect for Dino lead them to untenable positions. Hence the good fire/bad hire nonsense. "Well, Dino didn't know what he was doing and was a train wreck, blah blah blah. Yeah, Bz was terrible and DM isn't much better, but clearly Dino had to go." This is just such dumb bullshit. Dino reached NCAA 2/3 years, had one of the higher winning percentages of Wake coaches, recruited well. He also had a number of shortcomings that may have improved or not. But good lord to look at our last 8 or so years and argue firing Dino was in itself a good move and beyond debate is silliness to the extreme.