Author

admin

Browsing

  • The college football transfer portal is set to create a major shift in quarterback lineups for the upcoming season.
  • Several top programs, including Miami, LSU, and Florida, are expected to pursue new quarterbacks through the portal.
  • Many potential transfers involve quarterbacks reuniting with former coaches at new schools.

The opening of the college football transfer portal will trigger a game of musical chairs at quarterback guaranteed to impact next year’s race for the national championship.

As evidence, just look at this year’s College Football Playoff, where over half the teams in the field started a transfer under center – Indiana, Ohio State, Oregon, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Miami and Tulane.

One team that could influence how things unfold is Oregon, which is waiting on Dante Moore’s NFL draft decision. If he leaves, the Ducks will be near the top of the list for every high-profile transfer, potentially shaping plans for other contenders searching for a new starter.

As the portal heats up, let’s connect 10 Power Four programs with the best possible transfer fit:

Miami

Should Moore return, Miami’s recent success with Cam Ward and Carson Beck will make Coral Gables the most desirable destination for this year’s transfer class. One strong match is former Arizona State starter Sam Leavitt, who burst onto the national scene in 2024 but struggled through an injury-marred redshirt sophomore year. After a pair of one-year rentals, Mario Cristobal and the Hurricanes could be enticed by the chance to secure someone who could be a multiple-season solution.

Texas Tech

Texas Tech is waiting on Cincinnati transfer Brendan Sorsby, a native Texan who has starting experience, Big 12 experience and a dual-threat skill set that fits nicely in the Red Raiders’ scheme with Behren Morton moving on. Sorsby, however, could choose to forego his final season for the NFL if he receives a strong draft grade.

Indiana

Look for Curt Cignetti’s search for Fernando Mendoza’s replacement to land on TCU transfer Josh Hoover, who blossomed over two-plus years as the starter in Sonny Dykes’ scheme. While he’ll need to trim his turnovers, the rising senior has the makeup to help maintain the Hoosiers’ evolution into a Power Four powerhouse. As a high school recruit, Hoover was verbally committed to Indiana before flipping to the Horned Frogs.

Penn State

Drew Allar has exhausted his eligibility and replacement Ethan Grunkemeyer has an uncertain future. This one isn’t complicated: New coach Matt Campbell should be reunited with rising senior Rocco Becht, who started 39 games for Campbell at Iowa State and would ease his transition to the Big Ten.

LSU

Portal options might be tripping over themselves to get to the front of the line to play for Lane Kiffin at LSU. One is DJ Lagway, who oozes talent but never put things together in his two years at Florida. But Kiffin and the Tigers are likely waiting on a possible eligibility waiver for current Ole Miss starter Trinidad Chambliss, who has petitioned the NCAA for a sixth year. If he’s successful, Baton Rouge would be the obvious fit.

Florida

With Lagway gone and new coach Jon Sumrall in, the Gators could be in the market for multiple transfers to add to what is currently a thin quarterback room. One immediate connection is with Georgia Tech transfer Aaron Philo, who impressed in eight appearances over the past two years under new Florida coordinator Buster Faulkner. In his one start in 2025, Philo completed 21 of 28 passes for 373 yards against Gardner-Webb.

Auburn

Like Penn State, Auburn likely won’t look far for its new quarterback. As a first-year starter in 2025 under new coach Alex Golesh at South Florida, Byrum Brown threw for 3,158 yards, ran for 1,008 yards, had 42 combined touchdowns and might’ve been the nation’s most unheralded player. Landing Brown would really help speed up Golesh’s rebuilding project.

Clemson

Clemson could ignore the portal and roll with rising junior Christopher Vizzina, who threw for 406 yards in an uneven 2025 season as the primary backup, or redshirt freshman Chris Denson. But the Tigers really have to increase their options in what might be a make-or-break year. They should be in the mix for Sorsby, Lagway and others. One transfer who could bring some valuable athleticism to the competition is former Old Dominion starter Colton Joseph, who joined Brown as the only quarterbacks to throw for at least 2,000 yards and run for another 1,000 this season.

Tennessee

The idea of handing the keys to redshirt freshman George MacIntyre or incoming freshman Faizon Brandon should demand the addition of at least one experienced passer. Should the Volunteers be looking for a one-year rental before handing the keys to MacIntyre or Brandon in 2027, one option who checks the boxes is James Madison transfer Alonza Barnett III, a rising senior with the legs to bring an interesting new dimension to Josh Heupel’s offense.

Nebraska

The Cornhuskers will be looking for an offensive reboot built around a more athletic option. Rising sophomore TJ Lateef replaced an injured Dylan Raiola in early November and helped land the team in the Las Vegas Bowl, though he played poorly after an impressive debut against UCLA. One player who matches what Matt Rhule is looking for is Notre Dame transfer Kenny Minchey, a rising junior who pushed for the starting role this past summer and has looked very good in his limited opportunities.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

With 2026 now officially underway, the college football season is nearly at its end. But before we wrap things up in the Bowl Subdivision with next week’s College Football Playoff semifinals and the subsequent title game, we have one more full day of bowl games to enjoy.

If it’s big-name programs you want, Friday’s lineup might not appeal to you. But the slate does feature a couple of squads in the US LBM Coaches Poll, as well as some of the nation’s premier academic institutions. One of the prime-time contests will hopefully live up to our placement in the bowl rankings – several of which, we freely admit, were wildly off the mark. Here are the Friday bowl offerings.

Armed Forces Bowl: Texas State vs. Rice

Time/TV: 1 p.m. ET, ESPN in Fort Worth, Texas.

Why watch: The last full day of the bowl season kicks off with a pair of Lone Star State squads without much shared history. These same two teams did, however, square off in the First Responder Bowl two years ago, with the Bobcats taking a 45-21 decision. The 2025 campaign wasn’t a huge success for either program, but both should enjoy this opportunity. Unfortunately, Owls starting QB Chase Jenkins and backup Drew Devillier have announced plans to transfer, meaning either Lucas Scheerhorn or Patrick Crayton Jr., both little-used freshmen, will be pressed into service. The Bobcats should have most of their primary contributors, including QB Brad Jackson and WRs Beau Sparks and Chris Dawn.

Why it could disappoint: Texas State generates a ton of long scoring plays, and the Owls tend to give them up. That certainly looks ominous from a competitive standpoint.

Liberty Bowl: No. 25 Navy vs. Cincinnati

Time/TV: 4:30 p.m. ET, ESPN in Memphis, Tenn.

Why watch: With a double-digit win season and the Commander in Chief’s Trophy secured, the Midshipmen have one more goal to attain, a Top 25 ranking to finish the campaign. The Bearcats briefly cracked the poll themselves this fall before closing the year on a four-game skid. Cincinnati QB Brendan Sorsby is in the portal, so the start will go to Brady Lichtenberg, who has attempted just six passes but completed four of them. Navy QB Blake Horvath will look to close out his outstanding career on a high note, with help as usual from RB Alex Tecza and SB Eli Heidenreich.

Why it could disappoint: It shouldn’t. Even with most of its regular lineup, Navy doesn’t usually win with wide margins but by executing better in the details. Expect a close one here.

Duke’s Mayo Bowl: Wake Forest vs. Mississippi State

Time/TV: 8 p.m. ET, ESPN in Charlotte, N.C.

Why watch: Year one in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, under Jake Dickert unquestionably exceeded expectations. The Demon Deacons now look to close out the year by giving their new head coach a mayo bath. The Bulldogs managed just one victory in SEC play but were within a score on a couple other occasions. Wake QB Robby Ashford wasn’t always an accurate passer but usually got the ball where it needed to go. He will be without draft-bound RB Demond Claiborne and breakout WR Chris Barnes who is in the portal. The Mississippi State offense will be in the hands of freshman Kamario Taylor, who didn’t have much luck in his Egg Bowl start against Ole Miss but does have some speedy weapons at his disposal.

Why it could disappoint: Wake’s most significant strides this fall were on the defensive side, which was demonstrably not the case for the Bulldogs. Miss State could win a shootout, so it might behoove the Deacons to moderate the tempo.

Holiday Bowl: No. 20 Arizona vs. SMU

Time/TV: 8 p.m. ET, Fox in San Diego.

Why watch: The non-playoff bowl calendar closes in – usually – sunny San Diego, where the Wildcats and Mustangs could put on an offensive show. Both teams should have most of their top producers participating. Arizona QB Noah Fifita threw for 2,963 yards and 26 TDs, with WR Kris Hutson serving as primary target and RB Ismail Mahdi leading the ground game. SMU counters with QB Kevin Jennings, who also has 26 scoring tosses but twice as many picks with 10 on the season. He spreads the ball well, but TE Matthew Hibner is a valuable weapon in the red zone.

Why it could disappoint: We hope this one delivers the goods, but both teams have opportunistic defenses that thrive on takeaways. It might get away if those occur early, as happened to SMU in last year’s playoff appearance.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

The Winnipeg Jets enter 2026 on the other end of the NHL standings from where they were beginning 2025.

Not only are the 2024-25 Presidents’ Trophy winners not in a playoff spot, but the Jets are last in the Central Division, the Western Conference and the entire NHL.

It’s like they’re taking the Presidents’ Trophy curse to another level, because their struggles have worsened since getting eliminated in the first half of last post-season.

They’re like the New York Rangers, which won the Presidents’ Trophy in 2023-24 with 114 points but won 16 fewer games last season and missed the Stanley Cup playoffs altogether.

It’s difficult to see how the Jets can salvage their season and not end up like last season’s Rangers. Flipping a switch in the second half of the season and clawing their way past eight teams in the West to earn a playoff berth is a tall task.

Now, it’s true Winnipeg is only seven points behind the Los Angeles Kings, which sit in the second wild-card spot. Crazily enough, the Jets have only one fewer victory than the Kings, but L.A. has earned five more overtime losses. So in theory, the Jets could get back into the thick of the playoff race with a strong stretch of play.

But it’s less the points deficit than the teams in front of them that’s the problem. The rest of the playoff-chasers will continue to pick up points, and even teams that only have four wins in their past 10 games – the Utah Mammoth and St. Louis Blues – have at least four more points than Winnipeg.

Given that Winnipeg is 1-6-3 in its past 10 games entering Thursday’s New Year’s Day matchup against the Toronto Maple Leafs, you can see why there’s reason for pessimism about the Jets’ chances of turning things around anytime soon.

Without 2024-25 Hart Trophy winner Connor Hellebuyck for three weeks, the Jets went 2-8-1. Even when their starting goalie returned, the Jets have gone 1-4-3 since then, with Hellebuyck recording a .894 save percentage and 2.52 goals-against average.

At this time last year, the Jets had the third-most goals per game, the fewest goals against per game and the NHL’s best power play midway through 2024-25.

Now, the Jets rank 23rd in goals-for per game, 16th in goals against per game and 16th in power-play percentage. Their penalty kill percentage is also 18th, and they’re 1-11-1 when trailing after the first period and 4-7-2 when tied after the first.

If you’d said at the start of this season that Winnipeg could have the best odds at winning the NHL’s draft lottery and selecting phenom Gavin McKenna, Jets fans would’ve laughed in your face. But here we are, and that’s exactly what’s happening so far. 

Winnipeg GM Kevin Cheveldayoff is no doubt happy he held onto his first-round draft pick this year, and adding a generational talent like McKenna or Ivar Stenberg would ease the sting of the Jets’ collapse. That said, Winnipeg fans have grown accustomed to being a year-in, year-out playoff team, qualifying for the post-season in seven of the past eight seasons. So it must be quite the shock for them to look at the standings and see the Jets slumming it at the bottom of the league.

The trip from Presidents’ Trophy-winner to the basement of the NHL is something no team expects, but it goes to show you that the parity of the league is a very real thing. One year could be a feast for a team, and the following year could be a famine. And Winnipeg’s unanticipated woes this season have them in a position they’re going to have extreme difficulty recovering from.

For action-packed issues, access to the entire magazine archive and a free issue, subscribe to The Hockey News at THN.com/free. Get the latest news and trending stories by subscribing to our newsletter here. And share your thoughts by commenting below the article on THN.com or creating your own post in our community forum.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

  • The Fiesta Bowl semifinal pits No. 6 Ole Miss against No. 10 Miami, with the outcome likely decided in the trenches.
  • Miami’s success hinges on its defensive line dominating and its offense establishing a strong running game.
  • Ole Miss looks to counter with quarterback Trinidad Chambliss’s mobility and an offense that excelled against Georgia.

The Fiesta Bowl will be decided on the line of scrimmage.

The College Football Playoff national semifinal between No. 6 seed Mississippi and No. 10 Miami will come down to whether the Hurricanes can dictate things up front, much like they did in dispatching defending national champion Ohio State in the Cotton Bowl.

That win sent a clear message about how capably coach Mario Cristobal has installed his inside-out blueprint for rebuilding the program.

Ole Miss moved to 2-0 without Lane Kiffin by reversing a 21-12 deficit against No. 3 Georgia and winning the Sugar Bowl 39-34.

Whie losers to the Bulldogs during the regular season, the Rebels began to take control in the third quarter thanks to quarterback Trinidad Chambliss, who finished with 362 yards and two touchdowns.

Even with Kiffin off to LSU, the offense totaled with 473 yards on 6.5 yards per play.

Key factors for Miami

Now the Hurricanes will face the same challenge of slowing Ole Miss. Whether Miami advances to the championship game depends on two factors: its ability to command the ball on offense and whether its defensive line can dominate for the second game in a row.

Offensively, the Hurricanes will look to establish the run behind junior Mark Fletcher Jr. and a rapidly improving front. If successful, a solid running game opens things up for senior quarterback Carson Beck, who played things safe against the Buckeyes and was without an interception for the fifth time in six games.

On defense, Miami’s defensive front has the potential to give the Rebels fits and take over the Fiesta Bowl. This group bullied the Buckeyes’ offensive line and fazed a normally unflappable Julian Sayin, who had his worst game since the season opener against Texas.

How Ole Miss beats Miami

But based on its play against No. 11 Tulane and Georgia, Ole Miss could make the Hurricanes one-dimensional by limiting Fletcher’s impact. While hit or miss during the regular season, the Rebels’ run defense held the Green Wave to 115 yards and the Bulldogs to 124 yards, both on 3.4 yards per carry.

Slowing down the Hurricanes’ ground game will place pressure on Beck to deliver through the air against a pass defense that ranked first in the SEC during the regular season in opposing completion percentage (56.2) and gave up only 6.4 yards per attempt.

Whether Ole Miss can protect Chambliss is likely one of the game’s deciding factors. The Rebels have given up 18 sacks in 14 games and held the Bulldogs to just three tackles for loss. The Hurricanes added five sacks against OSU and now has a Bowl Subdivision-best 46 on the year.

Chambliss is the game’s key player

Chambliss’s mobility will help. The senior is able to keep plays alive with his legs and make plays on the move, occasionally tucking and running to extend drives. He has run for 520 yards, second on the team, and eight scores.

If able to get into a rhythm, Chambliss, running back Kewan Lacey and Ole Miss will be hard to keep under wraps. One factor that played into Miami’s hands in the Cotton Bowl was Ohio State’s tendency to play at a much slower tempo than Ole Miss. The Rebels often sprint to the line as soon as a play ends and look to snap the ball soon after.

So Miami has to disrupt that rhythm by winning on first down and setting Chambliss into longer third-down conversions. But even that isn’t a sure thing. Heading into the Sugar Bowl, the senior led the SEC with a 154.3 efficiency rating on third down.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

(TheNewswire)

 

Vancouver, British Columbia TheNewswire – December 31st, 2025 Prismo Metals Inc. (‘Prismo’ or the ‘Company’) (CSE: PRIZ,OTC:PMOMF) (OTCQB: PMOMF) is pleased to announce that further to its news release December 3, 2025, the Company has proceeded with an upsized closing (the ‘Closing’) of its previously announced non-brokered private placement of units of the Company (‘Units’) at an issue price of $0.10 per Unit (the ‘Private Placement’). The Closing consisted in the issuance of 2,940,000 Units for gross proceeds of $294,000.

‘With the exception of one investor, every subscriber in this last closing is a new shareholder of Prismo,’ said Alain Lambert CEO of Prismo. ‘Our immediate priority is to undertake our fully funded drill program, as previously announced. This drill campaign will focus primarily on the historic Silver King mine site and will be for a minimum of about 1,000 meters. The objective is to test the upper half of the steeply dipping pipelike Silver King mineralized body as well as potential mineralization adjacent to the dense stockwork that was the focus of historic mining.’

The Company previously announced the first closing of the Private Placement on November 12, 2025 for aggregate gross proceeds of $1,745,000 and a second closing of the Private Placement on December 2, 2025 for aggregate gross proceeds of $165,000. Due to strong investor demand, the Company has now raised aggregate gross proceeds of $2,204,000 through the sale of an aggregate of 22,040,000 Units.

Each Unit consists of one common share in the capital of the Company (a ‘Share‘) and one common share purchase warrant of the Company (a ‘Warrant‘). Each Warrant entitles the holder to purchase one Share for a period of thirty-six (36) months from the date of issue at an exercise price of $0.175.

The Company intends to use the net proceeds of the Private Placement primarily for drilling at its Silver King project and for general corporate purposes. There may be circumstances, however, where, for sound business reasons, a reallocation of funds may be necessary. The Company expects to accept additional subscriptions of Units from new shareholders in the coming days for an approximate amount of $75,000.

The Units issued pursuant to the Closing are subject to a four-month hold period from the closing date of the Closing under applicable Canadian securities laws, in addition to such other restrictions as may apply under applicable securities laws of jurisdictions outside Canada.

In connection with the Closing, the Company issued an aggregate of 185,200 finder’s warrants (the ‘Finder’s Warrants’) and paid finder’s commissions of $18,520 to a certain qualified finder. Each Finder’s Warrant is exercisable for a period of twenty-four (24) months from the date of issuance to purchase one Share at a price of $0.10. In addition, the Company paid a cash fee of $7,000 to a financial advisor.

The securities being issued in connection with the Closing have not been and will not be registered under the U.S. Securities Act and may not be offered or sold in the United States, or to, or for the account or benefit of, U.S. persons or persons in the United States, absent registration or an applicable exemption from the registration requirements. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of the securities in any State in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful.

About Prismo Metals Inc.

Prismo (CSE: PRIZ,OTC:PMOMF) is a mining exploration company focused on advancing its Silver King, Ripsey and Hot Breccia projects in Arizona and its Palos Verdes silver project in Mexico.

Please follow PrismoMetals on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, and YouTube

Prismo Metals Inc.

1100 – 1111 Melville St., Vancouver, British Columbia V6E 3V6 Phone: (416) 361-0737

 

Contact:

Alain Lambert, Chief Executive Officer alain.lambert@prismometals.com

Gordon Aldcorn, President gordon.aldcorn@prismometals.com

 

Neither the Canadian Securities Exchange nor its Market Regulator (as that term is defined in the policies of the Canadian Securities Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

 

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This release includes certain statements and information that may constitute forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. Forward-looking statements relate to future events or future performance and reflect the expectations or beliefs of management of the Company regarding future events. Generally, forward-looking statements and information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as ‘intends’ or ‘anticipates’, or variations of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results ‘may’, ‘could’, ‘should’, ‘would’ or ‘occur’. This information and these statements, referred to herein as ‘forward-looking statements’, are not historical facts, are made as of the date of this news release and include without limitation, statements regarding discussions of future plans, estimates and forecasts and statements as to management’s expectations and intentions with respect to, among other things: the timing, costs and results of drilling at Silver King; the intended use of any proceeds raised under the Closing; and the completion of an additional tranche.

These forward-looking statements involve numerous risks and uncertainties, and actual results might differ materially from results suggested in any forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things: the potential inability of the Company to utilize the anticipated proceeds of the Private Placement as anticipated; the potential inability of the Company to complete an additional tranche on the terms disclosed, or at all; and those risks set out in the Company’s public disclosure record on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.com) under the Company’s issuer profile.

In making the forward-looking statements in this news release, the Company has applied several material assumptions, including without limitation, that the Company will use the proceeds of the Closing as currently anticipated and on the timeline currently expected; and that the Company will complete an additional tranche.

Although management of the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements or forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and forward- looking information. Readers are cautioned that reliance on such information may not be appropriate for other purposes. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, forward-looking information or financial outlook that are incorporated by reference herein, except in accordance with applicable securities laws. We seek safe harbor.

 

NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO UNITED STATES NEWS WIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

Copyright (c) 2025 TheNewswire – All rights reserved.

News Provided by TheNewsWire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

TORONTO, ON / ACCESS Newswire / December 31, 2025 / 55 North Mining Inc. (CSE:FFF,OTC:FFFNF)(FSE:6YF) (‘55 North‘ or the ‘Company‘) is pleased to announce the appointment of Wayne Parsons as Executive Chair of the Board, effective January 1, 2026.

Mr. Parsons brings over 20 years of experience in the investment business, having worked at BMO, RBC and most recently at National Bank Financial. He has since established a consulting practice focused on the mining sector and provides strategic advisory services to mining companies focused on capital markets strategy, financing execution and investor engagement. Mr. Parsons has served on a number of boards, most recently with Bunker Hill Mining Corp.

‘Wayne’s skills and experience are exactly what 55 North needs as we advance this project toward production,’ said Bruce Reid, Chief Executive Officer of 55 North Mining. ‘He is well connected globally and will be a tremendous help in connecting us with the right people to get this project financed. We met in the early days of Bunker Hill Mining, and when that project encountered challenges, Wayne stepped in, personally funded the recapitalization, and helped assemble the team to move it forward. His reputation will be highly valuable to our future success.’

The Company believes Mr. Parsons’ appointment significantly strengthens its leadership and positions 55 North to execute on its strategy of advancing the Last Hope Gold Project toward development and production.

About 55 North Mining Inc.

55 North Mining Inc. is a Canadian exploration and development company advancing its high-grade Last Hope Gold Project located in Manitoba, Canada.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

Mr. Bruce Reid
Chief Executive Officer
55 North Mining Inc.
Phone: 647-500-4495
bruce@mine2capital.ca

Mr. Vance Loeber
Corporate Development
Phone: 778-999-3530
cvl@tydewell.com

CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION

This news release of 55 North contains statements that constitute ‘forward-looking statements.’ Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company’s actual results, performance or achievements, or developments in the industry to differ materially from the anticipated results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements.

SOURCE: 55 North Mining Inc.

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

News Provided by ACCESS Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Zinc companies were supported in 2025 as prices rebounded during the second half of the year and, by the end of December, had crossed above US$3,000 per metric ton.

However, the metal still faces headwinds, as its biggest demand driver is its use in the production of galvanized steel destined for construction projects. Weak outlook comes amid diminishing expectations of a resurgence in the Chinese housing sector.

Additionally, US trade policy has softened demand, as uncertainty has dampened investor sentiment.

Although surpluses in the mined supply of zinc have narrowed, a significant amount of refined product remains in warehouses, which continues to contribute to an oversupply.

Data was gathered on December 24, 2025, using TradingView’s stock screener, and only zinc stocks with market caps greater than C$50 million at that time were considered. Read on to learn more about their operations and plans.

1. Teck Resources (TSX:TECK.A,TSX:TECK.B)

Market cap: C$31.25 billion
Share price: C$62.65

Teck Resources is a major global polymetallic miner, as well as one of the world’s top zinc producers. The company is headquartered in Vancouver, British Columbia.

The Canadian company produced 615,900 metric tons (MT) of zinc in concentrate in 2024, with 555,600 MT coming from its Red Dog zinc mine in Alaska, US. The remaining 60,300 MT came from Teck’s 22.5 percent share of zinc production from the Peru-based Antamina copper-zinc mine.

Teck’s total 2025 production guidance for the base metal is set in a range of 525,000 to 575,000 MT. As of September, the company’s zinc production for the year totaled 456,000 MT.

In addition to the sites mentioned, Teck owns the Trail operations, which it describes as “one of the world’s largest fully integrated zinc and lead smelting and refining complexes.” Located in BC, the Trail operations produced 256,000 MT of refined zinc in 2024, with 190,000 to 230,000 MT of the material expected in 2025.

In September, Teck agreed to combine with mining giant Anglo American (LSE:AAL,OTCQX:NGLOY) in a C$70 billion ‘merger of equals’ to create Anglo-Teck. The merged company would remain headquartered in Vancouver and become BC’s largest company ever.

Then on December 15, Canada’s federal government announced it had approved the deal after both companies committed to securing 4,000 Canadian jobs and spending C$4.5 billion over five years within Canada. The merger’s completion still requires approvals from other countries and regulatory reviews.

2. Foran Mining (TSX:FOM)

Market cap: C$2.62 billion
Share price: C$4.87

Foran Mining is a development company advancing its McIlvenna Bay project in Saskatchewan, Canada, toward production.

The property consists of 113 claims covering an area of 140,445 hectares near Flin Flon on Saskatchewan’s border with Manitoba.

A technical report from the project released in March 2025 demonstrated an indicated resource of 1.86 billion pounds of zinc at an average grade of 2.18 percent from 38.6 million metric tons of ore, plus an inferred resource of 260 million pounds at a grade of 2.6 percent from 4.5 million metric tons.

In December 2025, Foran announced that development on the project was 79 percent complete, advancing on schedule and on budget, and the company remained on track to begin commercial production in mid-2026. It also said that at the end of November, ore stockpiles had reached approximately 165,000 metric tons.

‘Pre-commissioning activities are well underway, and progress to date demonstrates the operational readiness of our team and infrastructure,’ Foran Executive Chairman and CEO Dan Myerson stated. ‘… 2026 (is) an important transition year for Foran as the Company moves into production, while advancing Phase 2 planning and continued exploration focused on unlocking district scale potential.’

3. Trilogy Metals (TSX:TMQ)

Market cap: C$1.14 billion
Share price: C$6.66

Trilogy Metals is focused primarily on copper, zinc and cobalt at its Alaskan Upper Kobuk projects, which are held by Ambler Metals, a joint venture operating company owned equally by Trilogy and South32 (ASX:S32,OTC Pink:SHTLF).

Its most advanced zinc project is the Arctic copper-zinc-lead-gold-silver volcanogenic massive sulfide project, which is in the feasibility stage and has proven and probable reserves of 43.44 million MT grading 3.12 percent zinc.

In addition, early stage 2023 field work at the company’s wholly owned Helpmejack project in Alaska’s Ambler belt outlined two target areas prospective for volcanogenic massive sulfide and shale-hosted zinc deposits.

Trilogy had been focusing on improving access to the region with its Amber Access project, but it was rejected by the US Bureau of Land Management under the Biden administration in June 2024 due to the impact the proposed road could have on the environment and communities in the region, which has seen little development.

However, the current Trump administration has enacted a series of executive and secretarial orders focusing on developing Alaska’s natural resources, leading to the reversal of the decision.

On October 24, the company announced that the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority had issued a right-of-way permit for the road, re-establishing federal authorization for the project.

‘The execution of these federal permits marks a pivotal milestone for the Ambler Road and the State of Alaska,’ Trilogy Metals President and CEO Tony Giardini said.

4. Fireweed Metals (TSXV:FWZ)

Market cap: C$579.91 million
Share price: C$2.73

Fireweed Metals is a critical metals company whose flagship Macmillan Pass zinc project is located in Canada’s Yukon. In 2023, the company acquired the Gayna River zinc project in the Northwest Territories, as well as the Mactung tungsten project, which is adjacent to Macmillan Pass and straddles the border between Yukon and the Northwest Territories.

In November 2023, the Fireweed team, led by Dr. Jack Milton, the firm’s vice president of geology, received the Association for Mineral Exploration’s H.H. ‘Spud’ Huestis Award for its work at the Macmillan Pass property.

In September 2024, after its largest regional exploration campaign ever at Macmillan Pass, the company released an updated resource estimate for the Tom and Jason deposits, as well as inaugural resource estimates for the Boundary zone and End zone deposits.

Fireweed launched its 2025 field program in early June, planned to include 12,000 meters of diamond drilling at Macmillan Pass and 3,000 meters at Gayna.

On September 23, Fireweed reported one of the best assays ever recorded at Macmillan Pass from a 115 meter step-out hole at the Tom South target, which hosted a 54.82 meter intersection grading 18.2 percent zinc, including an interval of 7.1 meters with 32.82 percent zinc.

Then, in an update on December 11, the company announced its inaugural drilling at Gayna intersected zinc mineralization, with a highlighted assay of 51.22 meters grading 4.4 percent zinc, including 24 meters with 7.3 percent.

‘Our first season of drilling at Gayna successfully intersected significant zinc and lead mineralization at the Intrepid target, validating the prospectivity of the project,’ Fireweed Metals President and CEO Ian Gibbs said.

5. Emerita Resources (TSXV:EMO)

Market cap: C$167.89 million
Share price: C$0.57

Emerita Resources has a portfolio of high-grade, large-scale polymetallic projects covering more than 26,000 combined hectares in Spain’s Iberian Pyrite Belt. The company’s flagship asset is the Iberian Belt West project, which hosts three massive sulfide deposits: La Infanta, La Romanera and El Cura.

Emerita released a resource estimate for Iberian Belt West in May 2023. It finished environmental baseline studies the following month, and completed supporting documentation for its mining license application in December 2023.

In July 2024, the Andalusian government granted Iberian Belt West a declaration of strategic interest, which will streamline the process of moving the project through development.

Phase 2 metallurgical testing results for the La Romanera and La Infanta deposits released in late 2024 show that commercial-grade copper, lead and zinc concentrates can be obtained from both deposits.

In March of this year, Emerita announced an updated resource estimate for Iberian Belt West, showing a 35 percent increase to the total indicated mineral resource tonnage and a 44 percent increase in total inferred mineral resource tonnage.

The total indicated resource stands at 547,000 metric tons of zinc, with an average grade of 2.88 percent zinc, from 18.96 million metric tons of ore, and the inferred resource is 221,000 metric tons from 6.8 million metric tons grading 3.25 percent zinc.

The company has continued to explore the site through the rest of 2025. On October 17, the company announced it had extended the El Cura deposit by 90 meters and highlighted one intersection measuring 4.1 meters with a grade of 8.5 percent zinc.

Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Rio Silver Inc. (‘Rio Silver’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce that it has settled an aggregate of $293,250 of indebtedness (the ‘Debts’) through (1) the issuance of an aggregate of 1,396,428 common shares of the Company at a deemed issuance price of $0.21 per share, of which 976,190 shares were issued to non-arm’s length creditors; and (2) the issuance of an aggregate of 420,238 common share purchase warrants entitling the holders to purchase an aggregate of 420,238 common shares of the Company at a price of $0.28 per share until December 31, 2028, none of which share purchase warrants were issued to non-arm’s length creditors. All common shares and share purchase warrants issued to settle the Debts will be subject to a hold period expiring May 1, 2026. Completion of the securities for debt transaction will allow the Company to improve its current working capital deficiency position.

About Rio Silver Inc.

Rio Silver Inc. (TSX-V: RYO | OTC: RYOOF) is a Canadian resource company advancing high-grade, silver-dominant assets in Peru, the world’s second-largest silver producer. The Company is focused on near-term development opportunities within proven mineral belts and is supported by a seasoned technical and operational team with deep experience in Peruvian geology, underground mining, and district-scale exploration. With a clear development strategy, and a growing portfolio of highly prospective silver assets, Rio Silver is establishing the foundation to become one of Peru’s next emerging silver producers. Learn more at www.riosilverinc.com.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF Rio Silver INC.

Chris Verrico
President, Chief Executive Officer and a Director

To learn more or engage directly with the Company, please contact:

Christopher Verrico, President and CEO
Tel: (604) 762-4448
Email: chris.verrico@riosilverinc.com
Website: www.riosilverinc.com

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information: This news release includes forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. All statements within, other than statements of historical fact, are to be considered forward looking. Although the Company believes the expectations expressed in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, such statements are not guarantees of future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those in forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements include market prices, exploitation and exploration successes, continued availability of capital and financing, and general economic, market or business conditions. There can be no assurances that such statements will prove accurate and, therefore, readers are advised to rely on their own evaluation of such uncertainties. We do not assume any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

News Provided by GlobeNewswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESS Newswire / December 31, 2025 / Goldgroup Mining Inc. (‘Goldgroup‘ or the ‘Company‘) (TSXV:GGA,OTC:GGAZF)(OTCQX:GGAZF).

Goldgroup announces that, subject to the final approval of the TSX Venture Exchange (the ‘TSXV‘), it has entered into an agreement with a private arm’s length British Columbia company under which it has agreed to sell all of the issued and outstanding Class ‘A’ shares and Class ‘B’ common shares in the capital (collectively the ‘Apolo Shares‘) of Minera Apolo, S.A. de C.V. (‘Apolo‘), which owns all the issued and outstanding shares of Minera Catanava, S.A. de C.V. (‘MC‘). Apolo and MC collectively hold a 100% interest in the Pinos gold/silver project (‘Pinos‘) located in Zacatecas State, the second largest mining state in Mexico. Pinos comprises 30 contiguous mining concessions over 3,816 hectares. The sale of Apolo is an Arm’s Length Transaction and there are no finder’s fees payable.

Ralph Shearing, Chief Executive Officer, commented: ‘Having received an unsolicited bid for Pinos, management determined that it would be the best use of the Company’s resources to dispose of the Pinos asset based on the Company’s recent acquisition of the San Francisco gold mine, which is a much larger and more advanced project than Pinos. The Company’s focus will be the continued development and optimization of our flagship Cerro Prieto heap-leach gold mine and advancing towards a re-start of gold production at the San Francisco gold mine (see news release dated December 24, 2025). Both assets are located within 44km in a straight line from each other in the state of Sonora, Mexico. The San Francisco gold mine represents a unique opportunity to consolidate a highly prospective gold district.’ Mr. Shearing further stated: ‘At this stage of our Company’s development, with Pinos being a non-core asset, management and the board of directors has elected to monetize Pinos with an attractive, high cash purchase offer, deploying the sale proceeds towards Cerro Prieto optimization and re-starting gold production at San Francisco.

Under the terms of the Share Purchase Agreement, Goldgroup has agreed to sell all the Apolo Shares to a private arm’s length British Columbia company (the ‘Purchaser‘) in consideration of the payment to Goldgroup of US$5,000,000 in stages, with US$2,450,000 deposit payable on signing which will be refunded if the transaction does not close by February 16, 2026, US$550,000 to be paid on closing and US$2,000,000 to be secured by a Promissory Note and paid on or before the date that is six (6) months from the Closing Date. Further, the Purchaser has agreed to assume any and all liabilities of Goldgroup associated with Apolo, MC and the Pinos project, including the assumption of US$400,000 remaining payable on the original purchase agreement in addition to debt in the amount of US$1,500,000 payable to the previous owners of Apolo that will be triggered by the sale of Apolo. Goldgroup, the Purchaser and the previous owners of Apolo have also agreed to enter an Assumption and Acknowledgement Agreement under which the previous owners acknowledge and agree that they will have no further recourse against Goldgroup for any liabilities related to Apolo, MC and the Pinos project, all of which have been assumed by the Purchaser.

Cautionary Statement
The closing of the sale of Apolo is subject to the approval of the TSX Venture Exchange.

Clarification regarding Investor Relations Agreement
At the request of the TSXV, Goldgroup wishes to clarify its news release of October 13, 2025, regarding the retention of Machai Capital Inc. to provide digital marketing services on behalf of the Company. Goldgroup advises that it paid Machai Capital Inc. $200,000 as an upfront fee. Further Goldgroup advises that neither Machai Capital Inc. nor its principal Suneal Sandhu owned any securities of Goldgroup as at October 13, 2025.

About Goldgroup
Goldgroup is a Canadian-based mining Company with two high-growth gold assets in Mexico. In addition to the San Francisco gold mine, the Company has a 100% interest in the producing Cerro Prieto heap-leach gold mine located in the State of Sonora. An optimization and exploration program is underway at Cerro Prieto to significantly increase existing production and resources. The acquisition of Molimentales del Noroeste, S.A. de C.V. (‘Molimentales‘), the owner of the San Francisco gold mine is subject to final approval from the TSXV.

Goldgroup is led by a team of highly successful and seasoned individuals with extensive expertise in mine development, corporate finance, and exploration in Mexico.

For further information on Goldgroup, please visit www.goldgroupmining.com

On behalf of the Board of Directors

‘Ralph Shearing’
Ralph Shearing, CEO

For more information:
+1 (604) 306-6867
410 – 1111 Melville St.
Vancouver, BC, V6E 3V6
www.goldgroupmining.com
ir@goldgroupmining.com

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this press release.

CAUTIONARY NOTES REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
Certain information contained in this news release, including any information relating to future financial or operating performance, may be considered ‘forward-looking information’ (within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities law) and ‘forward-looking statements’ (within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995). These statements relate to analyses and other information that are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determinable and assumptions of management. Actual results could differ materially from the conclusions, forecasts and projections contained in such forward-looking information.

These forward-looking statements reflect Goldgroup’s current internal projections, expectations or beliefs and are based on information currently available to Goldgroup. In some cases forward-looking information can be identified by terminology such as ‘may’, ‘will’, ‘should’, ‘expect’, ‘intend’, ‘plan’, ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘estimate’, ‘projects’, ‘potential’, ‘scheduled’, ‘forecast’, ‘budget’ or the negative of those terms or other comparable terminology. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking information is subject to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to materially differ from those reflected in the forward-looking information, and are developed based on assumptions about such risks, uncertainties and other factors including, without limitation: receipt of all required TSXV, regulatory and other interested party approvals in connection with the Concurso Mercantilprocess; uncertainties related to actual capital costs operating costs and expenditures; production schedules and economic returns from Goldgroup’s projects; timing to integrate acquisitions (San Francisco Mine) and timing to complete additional exploration and technical reports; uncertainties associated with development activities; uncertainties inherent in the estimation of mineral resources and precious metal recoveries; uncertainties related to current global economic conditions; fluctuations in precious and base metal prices; uncertainties related to the availability of future financing; potential difficulties with joint venture partners; risks that Goldgroup’s title to its property could be challenged; political and country risk; risks associated with Goldgroup being subject to government regulation; risks associated with surface rights; environmental risks; Goldgroup’s need to attract and retain qualified personnel; risks associated with potential conflicts of interest; Goldgroup’s lack of experience in overseeing the construction of a mining project; risks related to the integration of businesses and assets acquired by Goldgroup; uncertainties related to the competitiveness of the mining industry; risk associated with theft; risk of water shortages and risks associated with competition for water; uninsured risks and inadequate insurance coverage; risks associated with potential legal proceedings; risks associated with community relations; outside contractor risks; risks related to archaeological sites; foreign currency risks; risks associated with security and human rights; and risks related to the need for reclamation activities on Goldgroup’s properties, as well as the risk factors disclosed in Goldgroup’s MD&A. Any and all of the forward-looking information contained in this news release is qualified by these cautionary statements.

Although Goldgroup believes that the forward-looking information contained in this news release is based on reasonable assumptions, readers cannot be assured that actual results will be consistent with such statements. Accordingly, readers are cautioned against placing undue reliance on forward-looking information. Goldgroup expressly disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, events or otherwise, except as may be required by, and in accordance with, applicable securities laws.

SOURCE: Goldgroup Mining, Inc.

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

News Provided by ACCESS Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

The 2026 World Cup kicks off with the opening match between Mexico and South Africa on June 11 in Mexico City, with the final taking place on July 19 at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey.

Here is a look at all the World Cup matches this summer and where those will be taking place:

World Cup 2026 host stadiums and cities for every game

(All times Eastern)

Arrowhead Stadium

  • Location: Kansas City, Missouri
  • Primary tenant: Kansas City Chiefs (NFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 16 – Argentina vs. Algeria, 9 p.m.
  • June 20 – Ecuador vs. Curaçao, 8 p.m.
  • June 25 – Tunisia vs. Netherlands, 7 p.m.
  • June 27 – Algeria vs. Austria, 10 p.m.
  • July 3 – Round of 32
  • July 11 – Quarterfinal

AT&T Stadium

  • Location: Arlington, Texas
  • Primary tenant: Dallas Cowboys (NFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 14 – Netherlands vs. Japan, 7 p.m.
  • June 17 – England vs. Croatia, 4 p.m.
  • June 22 – Argentina vs. Austria, 1 p.m.
  • June 25 – Japan vs. UEFA playoff B, 7 p.m.
  • June 27 – Jordan vs. Argentina, 10 p.m.
  • June 30 – Round of 32
  • July 3 – Round of 32
  • July 6 – Round of 16
  • July 14 – Semifinal

BBVA Stadium

  • Location: Monterrey, Mexico
  • Primary tenant: C.F. Monterrey (Liga MX)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 14 – UEFA playoff B vs. Tunisia, 10 p.m.
  • June 20 – Tunisia vs. Japan, 12 a.m. (11 p.m. local)
  • June 24 – South Korea vs. South Africa, 9 p.m.
  • June 29 – Round of 32

BC Place

  • Location: Vancouver, British Columbia
  • Primary tenants: Vancouver Whitecaps (MLS), BC Lions (CFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 13 – Australia vs. UEFA playoff C, 6 p.m.
  • June 18 – Canada vs. Qatar, 6 p.m.
  • June 21 – New Zealand vs. Egypt, 9 p.m.
  • June 24 – Canada vs. Switzerland, 3 p.m.
  • June 26 – New Zealand vs. Belgium, 8 p.m.
  • July 2 – Round of 32
  • July 7 – Round of 16

BMO Field

  • Location: Toronto, Ontario
  • Primary tenants: Toronto FC (MLS), Toronto Argonauts (CFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 12 – Canada vs. UEFA playoff A, 3 p.m.
  • June 17 – Ghana vs. Panama, 7 p.m.
  • June 20 – Germany vs. Ivory Coast, 4 p.m.
  • June 23 – Panama vs. Croatia, 7 p.m.
  • June 26 – Senegal vs. FIFA playoff 2, 3 p.m.
  • July 2 – Round of 32

Estadio Akron

  • Location: Guadalajara, Mexico
  • Primary tenant: C.D. Guadalajara (Liga MX)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 11 – South Korea vs. UEFA playoff D, 10 p.m.
  • June 18 – Mexico vs. South Korea, 9 p.m.
  • June 23 – Colombia vs. FIFA playoff 1, 10 p.m.
  • June 26 – Uruguay vs. Spain, 11 p.m.

Estadio Azteca

  • Location: Mexico City
  • Primary tenants: Club América and Cruz Azul (Liga MX), Mexico national soccer team

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 11 – Mexico vs. South Africa, 3 p.m.
  • June 17 – Uzbekistan vs. Colombia, 10 p.m.
  • June 24 – Mexico vs. UEFA playoff D, 9 p.m.
  • June 30 – Round of 32
  • July 5 – Round of 16

Gillette Stadium

  • Location: Foxborough, Massachusetts
  • Primary tenants: New England Patriots (NFL), New England Revolution (MLS)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 13 – Haiti vs. Scotland, 9 p.m.
  • June 16 – FIFA playoff 2 vs. Norway, 6 p.m.
  • June 19 – Scotland vs. Morocco, 6 p.m.
  • June 23 – England vs. Ghana, 4 p.m.
  • June 26 – Norway vs. France, 3 p.m.
  • June 29 – Round of 32
  • July 9 – Quarterfinal

Hard Rock Stadium

  • Location: Miami Gardens, Florida
  • Primary tenant: Miami Dolphins (NFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 15 – Saudi Arabia vs. Uruguay, 6 p.m.
  • June 21 – Uruguay vs. Cape Verde, 6 p.m.
  • June 24 – Scotland vs. Brazil, 6 p.m.
  • June 27 – Colombia vs. Portugal, 7:30 p.m.
  • July 3 – Round of 32
  • July 11 – Quarterfinal
  • July 18 – Third-place match

Levi’s Stadium

  • Location: Santa Clara, California
  • Primary tenant: San Francisco 49ers (NFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 13 – Qatar vs. Switzerland, 12 a.m. (9 p.m. local)
  • June 16 – Austria vs. Jordan, 12 a.m. (9 p.m. local)
  • June 19 – UEFA playoff C vs. Paraguay, 12 a.m. (9 p.m. local)
  • June 22 – Jordan vs. Algeria, 11 p.m.
  • June 25 – Paraguay vs. Australia, 10 p.m.
  • July 1 – Round of 32

Lincoln Financial Field

  • Location: Philadelphia
  • Primary tenants: Philadelphia Eagles (NFL), Temple Owls (college football)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 14 – Ivory Coast vs. Ecuador, 4 p.m.
  • June 19 – Brazil vs. Haiti, 9 p.m.
  • June 22 – France vs. FIFA playoff 2, 5 p.m.
  • June 25 – Curaçao vs. Ivory Coast, 4 p.m.
  • June 27 – Croatia vs. Ghana, 5 p.m.
  • July 4 – Round of 16

Lumen Field

  • Location: Seattle
  • Primary tenants: Seattle Seahawks (NFL), Seattle Sounders (MLS)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 15 – Belgium vs. Egypt, 3 p.m.
  • June 19 – USA vs. Australia, 3 p.m.
  • June 24 – UEFA playoff A vs. Qatar, 3 p.m.
  • June 26 – Egypt vs. Iran, 8 p.m.
  • July 1 – Round of 32
  • July 6 – Round of 16

Mercedes-Benz Stadium

  • Location: Atlanta
  • Primary tenants: Atlanta Falcons (NFL), Atlanta United (MLS)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 15 – Spain vs. Cape Verde, 12 p.m.
  • June 18 – UEFA playoff D vs. South Africa, 12 p.m.
  • June 21 – Spain vs. Saudi Arabia, 12 p.m.
  • June 24 – Morocco vs. Haiti, 6 p.m.
  • June 27 – FIFA playoff 1 vs. Uzbekistan, 7:30 p.m.
  • July 1 – Round of 32
  • July 7 – Round of 16
  • July 15 – Semifinal

MetLife Stadium

  • Location: East Rutherford, New Jersey
  • Primary tenants: New York Giants and New York Jets (NFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 13 – Brazil vs. Morocco, 3 p.m.
  • June 16 – France vs. Senegal, 3 p.m.
  • June 22 – Norway vs. Senegal, 8 p.m.
  • June 25 – Ecuador vs. Germany, 4 p.m.
  • June 27 – Panama vs. England, 5 p.m.
  • June 30 – Round of 32
  • July 5 – Round of 16
  • July 19 – Final

NRG Stadium

  • Location: Houston
  • Primary tenant: Houston Texans (NFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 14 – Germany vs. Curaçao, 1 p.m.
  • June 17 – Portugal vs. FIFA playoff 1, 1 p.m.
  • June 20 – Netherlands vs. UEFA playoff B, 1 p.m.
  • June 23 – Portugal vs. Uzbekistan, 1 p.m.
  • June 26 – Cape Verde vs. Saudi Arabia, 1 p.m.
  • June 29 – Round of 32
  • July 4 – Round of 16

SoFi Stadium

  • Location: Inglewood, California
  • Primary tenants: Los Angeles Chargers and Los Angeles Rams (NFL)

World Cup 2026 schedule:

  • June 12 – USA vs. Paraguay, 9 p.m.
  • June 15 – Iran vs. New Zealand, 9 p.m.
  • June 18 – Switzerland vs. UEFA playoff A, 3 p.m.
  • June 21 – Belgium vs. Iran, 3 p.m.
  • June 25 – USA vs. UEFA playoff C, 10 p.m.
  • June 28 – Round of 32
  • July 2 – Round of 32
  • July 10 – Quarterfinal
This post appeared first on USA TODAY