I know many in here will laugh and say this won't give Ukraine an advantage but they are wrong just like they were wrong about HiMARS would not make a difference. It's their way of coping because the naysayers will completely ignore purposely the capability that it will give Ukraine that Russia is lacking also... Night fighting. Superior night optics in Leos, Bradleys, Marders and CV-90s is a game changer in the way Ukraine will fight the ground war.
HIMAR has a disproportionate impact despite their small quantity, since a single battery can fire many precise salvos of missiles against critical supply lines, ammo depots, command facilities, and other military targets. It likely contributed significantly to the strategic withdrawal from Kherson since long-term reinforcement across the Dnieper was complicated by HIMAR's long-range and reach.
However, things are different with MBTs. MBTs need to be fielded in large quantities to make a genuine real impact. Ukraine apparently loses , so a few dozen Leopards is hardly a gamechanger in the battlefield the same way HIMARs in a game-changer. Even saying Western MBTs are more politically symbolic, rather than a game-changer on the battlefield. It may take over 2-years to field 160 Western MBTs according to that article...quite a long time to field a competent crew in large numbers.
There is a significant number of Bradleys', Marder's, and other IFVs, but I'm not super-confident that thin-armored APCs/IFVs would be much help given the proliferation of RPGs, infantry-operated ATGMs, etc... At best, this can help maintain the current frozen frontlines. You may need significant airpower to help breakthrough Russian frontlines, or else APCs/IFVs would be vulnerable to helicopters and other Russian airpower assets.