It's not a standard of quality but it's certainly a factor that (heavily) influences the price. They were always going to want a large fee for him as they would struggle to replace him.
Everton, like every other club, is entitled to their valuation of their own player. It does not mean we have to make their dreams come true.
So you admit that Mourinho wanted him; you admit that he isn't good enough and yet you've decided to blame Woodward for him being here while acting like Mourinho was just a passive bystander.
Do you not see the flaw in that? your entire argument boils down to 'yes Mourinho wants average players but whether they sign or not he's not to blame' it's ridiculous.
I fault woodward for paying 75m+ to get him. I would be less critical if we had signed him for much less, as the funds saved could be used towards other targets.
I do not hold Mourinho responsible cos Ed has the authority and responsibility for the transfers. Mourinho and Ed are not equals in the club structure. If Mourinho's desired targets are not in the best interests of the club, then Ed can veto/decline such deals (and he has done so for some - good or bad), and if needed can fire Mourinho. That he has chosen not to do so in other deals, means he agreed and authorized the deals, thus he is also responsible. Ed cannot be credited for declining some bad deals (like Perisic, Willian, etc) but then exonerated from approving other bad deals (Matic, Lukaku, Sanchez etc).
If Mourinho believes average players are what he needs to achieve the goals he has been hired for, when those average players are provided, it is on him if he succeeds or fails in achieving said goals. (But note that if he has asked for world class players but the club provides lesser quality or none, Mourinho has a legitimate excuse for not meeting his targets. If the club feels the players provided were sufficient for the task, then they should fire him and get someone that can achieve them with the players provided)