That may be true, but what’s the other solution? Revolving door of average managers? Guys like Pioli, Mihajlovic, Montella, Giampaolo, they’re all more or less in the same boat. A couple decent seasons between them, a few bad ones, fans debate whether their time at Milan will more like the good season or the bad ones on their resumes. They are ok managers who are quick to change the team and players at the first sign of failure, most don’t have distinct reliable systems in place the players can rely on.
That hasn’t worked, and like you and others have pointed out, they aren’t going to spend in the way a true top team should. Not until the club is bringing in more money. That decision is probably wise honestly, the club loses lots of money and was still going nowhere, even getting on the shit side of uefa. Innovation and a new approach is needed, undoubtedly. It’s different and yes risky, but it holds far more potential of actually changing the club then anything we’ve done for a decade, you have to see that.
I’ll even add, I’d like the team to take a different approach, but I’m on board with anything that’s a good idea as long as they commit to it. I believe the team should bring in more older, veteran players, solidify the team into the top 4, and then invest when the money starts to come in. Inter made top 4 with a very different team then what they’re fielding now, and a different manager as well. As soon as they spent two seasons in the Champions League, they changed their approach and aimed for a title, and they’re competing for it. I would love to bring in Thiago Silva, a guy like Modric, keep Zlatan etc, until we can aim higher. But that’s equally risky, and they cost high wages too.
Overall, yes there’s a lot of risk. But the longer the club sits in mediocrity, the longer it will take to rise again. I’ll take the approach of hiring a manager with a proven resume at building clubs in a certain manner, when you know the potential is to build a competitive team, rather than settle for a pragmatic, gattuso approach where the team is decent but the ceiling is low.
So acknowledging our current situation as what it actually is (poorly constructed thin team, a plainly mediocre coach, coasting along between places 6 and 8), let's assess what would be the best thing to do.
Assumption - Elliott cannot sell in the near future.
Now let's go to motivation. What is Elliott's driving motivation in running this club? They are a hedge fund and the only thing they want is maximizing profits when they sell the asset. So their primary motivation will be geared towards that over the next year or two (it has been so since last summer).
How can the they maximize profits? Route 1) by qualifying for CL, increased sponsorship money, stadium revenue. There's no stadium yet for revenue, there's no sponsorship money without CL, and that leaves only CL qualification in this route. Route 2) by cutting the wage bill, running costs, selling assets with market value. All the steps in this route are easily doable.
Now from Elliott's perspective, the need of the hour is pretty evident. Continue to do as much as possible of the route 2 requirements, while raising the profile of the brand to keep it attractive for a sale. The only possible route 1 scenario (CL qualification) has necessarily become a 'hope' now because anyone sensible in football knows that CL is not guaranteed without spending heaps of money. Elliott is a hedge fund, they won't go for hopeful bets, they'll go for guaranteed outcomes.
This is where we are now. For me, the reason to follow Milan is sporting success. I don't particularly care for a sleek, sexy wage bill full of 20-year old potential talents. So for fans like me, there really isn't nothing to get excited about in such scenarios except to wait until there's an eventual sale.
Coming back to your question now, I agree that there aren't many options available during this period which would guarantee a better outcome than the Rangnick option. With Elliott's approach and motivation that we discussed, it's 99% unlikely that Milan would get sporting success under their ownership no matter who the manager is. Essentially, it's the Arsenal scenario.
However, we need to acknowledge the risks. Clubs which want to stay upper mid-table in Serie A usually have fool-proof approaches to do so. Hire a coach like Pioli, build a team with a mix of experience and youth, go for a 55-65 point season. With a Rangnick situation though, that bare threshold is not a guarantee anymore. The team will be full of youngsters, I can guarantee that. For the first 6 months of the season, there will be a genuine chance for every other team in the league to beat a team like that. Rangnick is notoriously ego-driven and doesn't believe in anyone else interfering with his teams. So he will double down and not course-correct (like Maldini did with Pioli). All of this presents a real risk of a horrendous start to the season.
These are my thoughts at present.