I think a lot of the discord here comes from different understandings of 'gyroscope'.
To me a gyroscope is a symmetrical solid object rotating fast enough to exhibit rigidity in space.
The motion of such an object can be analysed using the same mathematics of forces, masses and accelerations as any other object, but when that is done there is a set of relatively simple gyroscope equations to use to predict the precession of the gyroscope at 90 degrees to a torque applied to the axis.
If an object is not solid or is not symmetrical or is not spinning fast enough it is not a gyroscope.
Its motion can still be analysed using mathematics developed to derive the motion of a gyroscope, but in the case of a helicopter rotor there are very many other factors to take into account and some more qualified than me say these dominate the motion of the blades. I follow them.
If you do not accept my definition of a gyroscope then we will never agree. ;-)