Being marginally better than terry dunfield isn't exactly a reason to be proud
Nobody believed dunfield was the answer, being better (or more accurately, less crap) than him doesn't prove anything. It'll be whether we improve after a year of herdman or not that you can judge. And even then it'll be a case of a bad hire and not a wrong dismissal
There is absolutely no credible argument that we should have stuck with Bradley. He completely shat the bed on roster construction (and on gutting the talent we did have) worse than anyone in league history, had a divided dressing room and was completely unable to get even mediocre results from the squad that was left. His successors being bad can't change the reality that was him here. He'll be judged on his results here and they are what they are.