Right, I realise my last reply might sound a little harsh, but in my first post I mentioned the fire pit that is the PL and what we're up against across the spectrum, in which I put Dortmund to the side because what they had to do is not comparable with what you're up against in this league. You are talking about a trundle back to the top, which our own consultant has said is not necessary and has pitfalls in and of itself (which I highlighted in said post); clubs do what they can and have to as succinctly as circumstances allow. Juventus and Milan also fit this determination - Juve with their infamous haggling, loans, buying on the cheap and so forth. Milan are a little different, but their time constraints, in all aspects, are nothing like what Manchester United face or the hurdles we need to overcome to even challenge for the title let alone be a frontrunner.
Idealism is nice, but when broken down each club will have underlying factors for their conduct and execution, and every club rebuilds in the way that is optimal for them. City just threw away hordes of players because money is no concern for them; Klopp got by with what he had to, but had absolutely no hesitation in doing jaw-dropping financial deals the moment they were a go and needed. Cheslea drop managers and have a constant stream of players coming in and out of the club - a total rebuild is never on the cards for them.
Manchester United are not going to spend 3-4 years treading water *if* what they hope to do can be executed in 2. They just aren't. You build and construct around vital components, of which, I would think midfield will be paramount for the football ten Hag plays, so it would be no surprise whatsoever to see major outlay in that department. As stated previously, Tchouameni's quality is predicated by those seeking his signature. If we can get him here, we're going to use the means necessary to offset all the reasons not to come here. None of what you said is special for a player who has his pick of clubs as it can be matched everywhere else. We're in a time where City, Liverpool, PSG, Chelsea and Madrid could all do with replenishment in midfield, I think the only club there where he doesn't become a starter off the bat is Madrid, and that's dependent on Modric and Casemiro's legs. Being a starter here is neither here nor there in terms of enticement.
If you're saying just let the player go elsewhere, why would we do that if we genuinely believe he would expedite our rebuild? It's not a case of like-for-like as there isn't another CM who is available and as highly touted as the player. Even if we throw our hat in, he may opt to go elsewhere, which is fair enough, but the notion we should dip out because of wages and not repeating mistakes of the past is asinine to me. The biggest failings of this regime has been having no plan or clue of what we need or how to use what we buy. Handing out stupid renewals and paying squaddies absurd wages is also far worse than paying players who were highly coveted a wage that keeps them in line.
We're arse backwards right now and won't right that ship until in a position of dominance at which point we can dictate and make sweeping changes. That doesn't happen when you're lingering in no-mans land and your pull is as low as it's ever been. 'Take this or we walk'leaves no impression when the players will gladly opt for another club.