Liverpool Transfer Rumours: Reds Smart to Wait It out with Tom Ince
The main factor holding up any such deal for Ince is, of course, money.
In a report by the BBC Sport staff, Liverpool is reportedly offering around £6 million for Ince, while Reading jumped into the bidding with an offer that fell just short of Blackpool's £8 million goal for the talented winger.
The ideal situation for Liverpool is to just wait Ince and Blackpool out as the 21-year-old's contract is set to expire during the summer. A late steal by Reading would have squashed those plans entirely, but it doesn't appear that will happen.
According to a report by the ESPN.com staff, Reading's offer has been rejected by Blackpool.
"Reading have had an offer for Tom Ince rejected by Blackpool after Brian McDermott confirmed the club are interested in the England Under-21 player," per the report.
Liverpool's calculated stinginess looked to be a potential undoing in this situation, but it appears Blackpool's superior stinginess has truly been a benefit.
There is little time left in the window and there isn't much on the radar as far as Ince going someplace else is concerned. A late, unexpected move by Blackpool doesn't seem likely at the moment.
The Reds have been busy during January, and their most recent move was for midfielder Philippe Coutinho, who has already been pictured holding the club's jersey, per John Drayton of the Daily Mail.
Considering Blackpool's price tag for Ince, that would have been a lot of money for Liverpool to spend when they have the potential to get Ince for cheaper come the summer. Not to mention, Ince's roots are with Liverpool, so that instantly gives the Reds a major leg up.
Ince is a dynamic player with incredible athleticism that makes him an explosive scorer whenever the ball is in his possession. He's scored 15 goals in 26 games this season, including two in Blackpool's latest winning effort.
Ince would no doubt be a huge boost to Liverpool's offense now, but a little patience will be necessary in this instance.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?