Look, you'll find numerous examples of me on here defending positions of nuance over reactionary comment. I find the transfer thread to be one of the most negative and hysterical forums on here, where most opinion is informed by nothing more than casual tabloid sensationalism.
One thing I won't do is pull you up for having your opinions. I might debate you on the merits of them, but ultimately it is your choice to feel dissatisfied and provide rationale for that. I don't disagree that Jack Grealish is probably 'past his best', is overpaid (along with every other footballer on the face of the planet) and was probably a bit of a gamble. I will disagree that he has 'questionable off field behaviour', but let's not get into the ins and outs of casual tabloid sensationalism right now.
One thing I will pull you up on, though, is if you pretend not to have had those opinions, or that you meant something different by them than you originally intended. You were quite clearly dissatisfied with the decision for Everton to be in for Grealish (along with being generally dissatisfied, it seems, with every other piece of transfer business in the summer) for the aforementioned reasons. You were very vocal about that dissatisfaction to the point where you evidently didn't want the transfer to go ahead.
Now he looks like our most important player, and someone has pulled you up on that original foundation. Can you admit that you were wrong, and that it was a good bit of business?