I think that if dana is really as good a friends with chuck as he says, then his decision to retire chuck and give him a paying job elsewhere in the ufc is a respectable one. although i do also agree completely with thenegation that it should have been done in private.
While dana did invite couture at 44 and coleman at 45 back to fight, i think his decisions were understandable. coleman wanted to fight, probably because he needed to money. coleman isn't danas good friend, but he is a decent draw, so if coleman wants to fight then sure, he can fight.
Couture is 44, and has had issues with the ufc and contracts etc. he may be 44 but the guy is a model of good health and fitness. Not only that, but he could actually back himself and when he did return, he won the heavyweight belt. Thus, his return was justifiable.
Chuck however, has lost 4 of his last 5 fights. 3 or those 4 losses have been via brutal knockout. I can't really see a way to justify him staying in the sport. He has been there while the UFC rose to it's current heights. He has been champion. he has fought the best, and beat the best. he is mega rich. So it's hard to justify him to keep fighting, especially if he's dana's friend. It's like if your own friend wanted to keep fighting, but kept getting brutally knocked out. he's your friend. he's taking serious damage, and he has a wife and kids to support. I think dana's decision is justified, and by giving chuck a position elsewhere in the ufc, probably as a commentator or promotor, he is basically compromising with chuck by saying, 'dont worry about money, i will continue to pay you well - i just dont want to see you keep taking unneccesary damage'.
so yeah, i actually agree with dana here, and can completely see his point. i would almost definately do the same thing - except for, as negation said, making it public. By making it public like this, many casual fans or people who simply read headlines could interpret it as dana losing respect for chuck - when in fact, it's actually the opposite.