The Hornet can't be all that bad a fighter though. At least judging
from the fact that a number of airforces - not Navies(!) - have chosen
it as their primary (air-to-air) fighter. It's the F-18 A/B and C/D
though, not the heavier 'Super' E/F, which makes a big difference.

Canada, Finland, Spain and Switzerland spring into mind. Eg in the
case of Finland, F-18C/D beat in competition in the early '90s
JAS Gripen, Mirage 2000-5, (the then current) F-16 and MiG-29.
The competition was all about air-to-air, as air-to-ground capability
wasn't even considered (not a requirement). The Hornet got the highest
absolute score, and also the highest score per dollar (life span
cost). Sure, there were other issues too, like availability (Gripen)
and politics (eg whether AMRAAM would be part of the package), but
still it seems obvious that the Hornet was the overall favourite of
the FAF.

F-14 would have been in different league (weight, price etc), had
there been a modern version to consider. Much like eg F-15 or Su-27
weren't considered.

You have to keep in mind, that the F-18C/D offered to Finland and
Switzerland at the start of the 90's had a new radar (APG-73) and more
powerfull engines (F404-402 EPE) then the then current version of F/A-18C/D.
And they were offered with then modern weapons AIM-9 M / AIM-120 B and self
protection systems ALR-67 / ALE-47 / AN/ALQ-165. I don't know what they
offered with the other planes, but I doubt it was as current.