Search results

Yeah, he said there was interest but didn't mention whether it was to loan or buy. Perhaps we enquired about a loan and were told no.

Why does that mean we or other clubs weren't keen on a loan? Naylor confirmed the interest in the player was genuine.

We wanted him on loan, reportedly. He wouldn't have been on mega money so I'm sure we could've afforded it. Certainly, would've been cheaper than Fati.

Fofana. On loan at Union Berlin now.

Reportedly very good but not seen him myself other than a clip of two. Has he been linked? I thought he was off to Spurs.

If we got Kudus, would we still be interested? I wouldn't have thought so. Also, City want Paqueta so maybe Palmer will be a bargaining chip in that deal.

Lots of talk of a loan to West Ham now

But if offered the choice everyone would rather take another Colwill than an Izzy Brown.

But you said "The Colwill situation has worked out in the exact worst case scenario." Colwill being utter rubbish would've been worse imo. We needed him during those periods when Webster was injured.

Goal and 2 assists, in fact.

Plenty of appearances but less than 900 minutes on the pitch across all competitions.

Naylor confirms that we're interested: Cole Palmer is another midfielder Brighton like, but no formal approach has been made to Manchester City about the England under-21 prospect. Palmer is available on loan from Pep Guardiola’s treble winners for the forthcoming campaign Source: The Athletic

I mean taking him on loan would be our back up option if we can't sign our priority targets.

Disaster? We had a fantastic player for a year for minimal outlay. Last summer, we tried to get him on a permanent deal but Chelsea weren't interested, knowing full well his potential.

That's what The Sun are suggesting. https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/22895499/brighton-cole-palmer-transfer-man-city/ You'd think this would only be a backup option if we aren't able to bring in one of our midfield targets.