It was reported that ten Hag wanted to keep him around as #2 due to his positive influence in the dressing room. I discussed this with others when the news came out and was fine with as long as De Gea was no longer #1. EtH tried to keep Matic around for the same reason.
Aye and in isolation I would have no problem with that if De Gea was fine with those terms, even though there's a very strong argument that we would be spending far, far too much on our second choice goalkeeper in that scenario.
But in this case the context is initially agreeing a contract with him to be #1, withdrawing it,
then offering that contract to be #2. And that's different.
I would argue that:
a) He probably shouldn't have been offered the contract to be #1 in the first place because it's been clear all season he isn't up to the job.
b) He
definitely shouldn't have been offered that contract to be #1 if we weren't actually certain we wanted him to be #1 next season.
c) It's needlessly disrespectful to tell someone you think they're worth less than they're being paid, agree a new salary, then come back a few weeks later and say "actually we think you're worth even less than that". Even if your final assesment of their worth is the correct one.
d) This should all have been resolved before now. Not still be ongoing with a contract still on the table for him to potentially sign.
It's all needlessly messy and indecisive. He should just have been cut lose as cleanly as possible.