The human mind resists accepting decisions made without a proportional amount of effort put into those decisions. If we only get one candidate for the job, we will either hire them and deal with constant nagging doubt, or we will lower our standards to get more options we can reject to feel good, but at which point we've now created false hope in the remaining candidates and an illusion of more opportunities existing than actually do.
Humans are messy, and so everything is always fucked. Even when it's not, we find a way to make it so.
I would rather keep a consistently mediocre individual than an inconsistent one because I know what I can and can’t trust the former with. I have to keep checking in on the latter. But I’ve met more than a couple loudmouths who disagree. Who think they can raise their stock by pushing someone else’s down.
Whether you see actions or not, I assure you that time and energy are being wasted on regrets.
What is unique to academia is the static supply of jobs. When people don't leave, new people face a huge uphill battle to join, and that battle is largely against their competition, not the institution that they seek to join.