Author

admin

Browsing

  • Four NFL teams currently hold multiple first-round picks for the 2026 draft.
  • Indiana quarterback Fernando Mendoza is projected to be the first signal-caller selected.
  • The New York Jets, holding five first-round picks over the next two years, are projected to select a quarterback with their first 2026 selection.

The rising importance of the 2026 NFL Draft for several teams came into focus after last week’s trade deadline.

With the New York Jets having dealt cornerback Sauce Gardner to the Indianapolis Colts, there are now four NFL teams that have multiple first-round picks in April. And with the Tennessee Titans and New York Giants having already fired their head coaches, several fan bases are probably ready to close the book on this season and enter offseason mode. But with the first-round order still shifting significantly week to week, there’s still ample time for team’s draft fortunes to rise or fall.

With that said, here’s USA TODAY Sports’ latest first-round projection and 2026 NFL mock draft:

2026 NFL mock draft

1. Tennessee Titans – Arvell Reese, LB/DE, Ohio State

There’s a strong possibility for Tennessee to possess the No. 1 pick in consecutive years after the Saints’ and Browns’ victories left the Titans as the only one-win team remaining. And that creates a bit of a mystery atop the order. An organization that’s yet again rebooting would clearly stand to benefit from trading back and stockpiling more early selections to support Cam Ward. Yet this quarterback class doesn’t seem particularly conducive to drumming up a bidding war for this choice. If Tennessee does end up in the slot and stands pat, it could supercharge its defense with Reese. Though he operates as a linebacker for the Buckeyes, the 6-foot-4, 243-pounder has Micah Parsons-like movement abilities that could be best put to use in a full-time edge rushing role. The Titans could pair him with Jeffery Simmons to create one of the league’s most formidable inside-outside tandems and then use the rest of the draft – and free agency – to focus on helping Ward.

2. New Orleans Saints – Fernando Mendoza, QB, Indiana

A franchise with a decades-long habit of being trigger-shy when it comes to selecting quarterbacks might be hard-pressed to go this route, especially if Tyler Shough continues to exhibit the promise he displayed in his second start. But unless the second-round rookie firmly establishes himself as New Orleans’ answer at the position in the back half of the season, Mendoza might be massively alluring. The Heisman Trophy front-runner now also figures to be the favorite to be the first quarterback taken, with his game-winning drive against Penn State highlighting resiliency and a knack for operating out of structure that otherwise hadn’t been seen often this season. The 6-5, 225-pounder is the kind of precise thrower who could allow Kellen Moore to launch a new era for the organization in earnest.

3. New York Giants – Jordyn Tyson, WR, Arizona State

The reset is officially on, with Big Blue pulling the plug on the Brian Daboll era on Monday. Still, the mission for New York remains the same: elevate Jaxson Dart’s supporting cast as quickly as possible. A well-rounded receiver who can win in a variety of ways, Tyson would complement Malik Nabers well in the top target’s return to action and allow Dart to be less reliant on leveraging his running skills to fuel the offense.

4. Cleveland Browns – Ty Simpson, QB, Alabama

The experience question might be the only thing holding back Simpson’s draft stock, but the Crimson Tide passer’s relatively abridged body of work hasn’t impeded him on the field this season. The 6-2, 208-pound signal-caller continues to look fully ready for the pros thanks to his rare composure and fast processing. That’s the kind of package that the Browns would pounce on after watching the offense spin its wheels behind Dillon Gabriel.

5. New York Jets – Dante Moore, QB, Oregon

With five first-round picks over the next two years after its pair of trade deadline blockbusters, New York has unparalleled flexibility to shape its future at the most important position in football. Gang Green therefore might not force the issue right away with the third passer off the board. But Moore is plenty talented and would allow Aaron Glenn and first-year offensive coordinator Tanner Engstrand to actually attack via the air after the offense has remained grounded with Justin Fields at the helm. Still only a redshirt sophomore, Moore might end up returning to school and vying to be the No. 1 pick in 2027. But he’s shown plenty to like, including impressive poise and a comfort attacking every level of the field as he continues to gain experience.

6. Las Vegas Raiders – Rueben Bain Jr., DE, Miami (Fla.)

This was supposed to be a season of great change for the Silver and Black, but the view from the back of the AFC West looks awfully familiar. The Raiders should know by now that there’s no cure-all for the team’s abundant ills, so they should instead simply gravitate toward the best players available. Bain has a strong case to be the top prospect in the class, as he’s been the most dominant defender in college football. If he lasts to this point, it should be a no-brainer for Las Vegas to put him opposite Maxx Crosby, who has been doing well more than his fair share to prop up this team.

7. Miami Dolphins – Caleb Downs, S, Ohio State

With a new general manager set to come aboard and Mike McDaniel’s future yet to be decided, Miami could go in a number of different directions this offseason. Whatever vision the Dolphins end up embracing for their future, though, Downs should fit it. A versatile playmaker and heady leader, the safety is capable of transforming a secondary in dire straits while also making a distinct mark for a run defense in need of serious help.

8. Washington Commanders – Keldric Faulk, DE, Auburn

Less than a year after the team reached the NFC title game, a calamitous campaign has forced Washington to face some harsh realities about the state of its roster. The Commanders’ defensive line looks overdue for a serious investment, and the 6-6, 285-pound Faulk can step in as a high-floor run stuffer with a good amount of room to grow as a pass rusher.

9. Cincinnati Bengals – Peter Woods, DT, Clemson

Outside of standout cornerback DJ Turner, Cincinnati has come up empty on its various defensive draft investments in recent years. While there might be a gaping hole on the edge once Trey Hendrickson departs as expected, the Bengals also have a glaring deficiency on the interior to address. Woods has fallen short of becoming the consistently disruptive force some envisioned him as after his first two seasons of flashes, but he’s still in a class of his own among the forthcoming defensive tackle prospects, especially when it comes to shedding blocks.

10. Los Angeles Rams (from Atlanta Falcons) – Spencer Fano, OT, Utah

Sure looks like the Falcons could be paying a hefty bill for April’s move to secure James Pearce Jr. in the back of the first round, as Atlanta is trending toward having to hand over a pick somewhere in the top 8-12 slots. The Rams’ foresight pays off massively here in the form of Fano, a talented and athletic blocker who could take over for longtime starter Rob Havenstein at right tackle.

11. Arizona Cardinals – Francis Mauigoa, OT, Miami (Fla.)

Arizona probably doesn’t need the 6-6, 315-pounder to haul in trick-play touchdowns like he did Saturday for the Hurricanes. Mauigoa’s brand of bully ball should make him sufficiently attractive for the Cardinals, with his stout protection also coming in handy to counter the NFC West’s many imposing pass rushers.

12. Dallas Cowboys – David Bailey, OLB, Texas Tech

Jerry Jones might never admit defeat in the Micah Parsons trade, and he might be reticent to push his draft chips in on another undersized edge rusher after taking Donovan Ezeiruaku in the second round in the spring. But getting quick pressure is the name of the game right now for NFL defenses, and no one in this class does it better than Bailey, who has terrorized opposing passers to the tune of 11 ½ sacks – best in the Football Bowl Subdivision – this season for the Red Raiders.

13. Baltimore Ravens – T.J. Parker, DE, Clemson

Landing impending free agent Dre’Mont Jones at the trade deadline patched up a problem that figures to persist into 2026 for Baltimore. Parker hasn’t broken through to top-tier edge rusher territory, but he can still be a disruptive and productive staple of the Ravens’ rotation.

14. Minnesota Vikings – Jeremiyah Love, RB, Notre Dame

It’s still unclear exactly what Minnesota has in J.J. McCarthy, but the young quarterback’s trajectory should leave Kevin O’Connell with a good bit of unease. It’s too early to reverse course, so bringing on the dynamic and elastic Love could help settle things down by reshaping the offense.

15. Houston Texans – Olaivavega Ioane, G, Penn State

While everything around him has collapsed at Penn State, Ioane continues to get the job done at an All-American level, letting almost nothing past him in pass protection. That’s the kind of presence Houston has long needed on its offensive front, and it shouldn’t blink at taking an interior blocker this high given how detrimental the problems along the line have been.

16. Carolina Panthers – Aveion Terrell, CB, Clemson

A passing attack that looks allergic to trying anything downfield is highly problematic for the Panthers, but Carolina needs to look from within for solutions rather than burn a third consecutive first-round pick on a receiver in hopes of resolving the issue. Terrell gets to join his brother, the Falcons’ A.J. Terrell, in the NFC South while lining up across from Jaycee Horn to accelerate the defense’s growth.

17. Kansas City Chiefs – Kenyon Sadiq, TE, Oregon

Maybe it’s time to stop trying to reconfigure the Chiefs’ receiving corps given how far down the group now finds itself on the list of Kansas City’s most pressing concerns. Sadiq, however, would be a worthy successor to Travis Kelce thanks to his dynamic pass-catching skills, and he would also elevate the floundering run game with his highlight-reel blocks.

18. San Francisco 49ers – Kadyn Proctor, OT, Alabama

The 6-7, 366-pound Proctor figures to be a polarizing evaluation in the draft due to some uneven play and a unique body type. But San Francisco needs a vision for the future at left tackle, and Proctor is sure to be a force with his powerful play.

19. Browns (from Jacksonville Jaguars) – Carnell Tate, WR, Ohio State

Cleveland should rejoice if it’s able to keep Tate in Ohio following his breakout season. It’s not often that teams can find 6-3, 195-pound receivers who exhibit advanced polish for their position while also averaging 18.2 yards per catch, much less in the back half of the first round.

20. Pittsburgh Steelers – Mansoor Delane, CB, LSU

Right now, there’s no telling where Pittsburgh will turn at quarterback in 2026 as it sees how far 41-year-old Aaron Rodgers can take the offense. While someone like South Carolina’s LaNorris Sellers could be a consideration if he declares – and is available at this point – the Steelers probably need to find clarity behind center before they come on the clock with this selection. Delane’s steadiness would make him a welcome addition to a defense that’s too often been burned when it hasn’t been able to generate pressure or spark big plays, and veteran starter Darius Slay Jr. isn’t signed beyond this season.

21. Dallas Cowboys – Jermod McCoy, CB, Tennessee

It’s unclear when, if ever, the star cornerback will make his 2025 debut for the Volunteers as he continues to rehab a torn anterior cruciate ligament suffered in January. His talent alone, however, might be enough to entice Jerry Jones, who took a risk on another talented coverage asset coming off a major injury in Shavon Revel Jr., the third-round rookie cornerback from East Carolina.

22. Chicago Bears – Cashius Howell, DE/OLB, Texas A&M

Chicago’s defense has been overly reliant on generating a league-leading 20 takeaways to mask the other major shortcomings of this unit. If the Bears are willing to get creative to jolt a pass rush that ranks 26th with a 30.9% pressure rate, according to Next Gen Stats, Howell could be an intriguing option. The Bowling Green transfer has put aside questions about his build by tapping into his quickness and bend, which has allowed him to record a Southeastern Conference-leading 10 ½ sacks.

23. Buffalo Bills – Makai Lemon, WR, USC

Brandon Beane went fishing for Jaylen Waddle prior to the trade deadline, according to NFL Network’s Tom Pelissero, but ended up with the boot that is Buffalo’s current receiving corps. If Beane is prepared to admit some level of fault on this front after repeatedly pushing back on questions of the group’s composition, he could be drawn to Lemon. The 5-11, 195-pound target doesn’t have the physical make-up of the go-to option the Bills currently lack, but the Power Four leader in receiving yards (937) serves his quarterback by freeing himself up underneath and racking up yards after the catch.

24. Tampa Bay Buccaneers – CJ Allen, LB, Georgia

The second level continues to be a stubborn issue for Tampa Bay’s defense, which can’t keep counting on 35-year-old Lavonte David to hold things together. The undersized yet aggressive Allen would be a fitting long-term answer, and he’d immediately smooth out some of the coverage issues that keep popping up.

25. Detroit Lions – Matayo Uiagalelei, DE, Oregon

The link between player and team has persisted for some time, and it likely will for a good while. Uiagalelei is exactly what Dan Campbell covets in a potential running mate for Aidan Hutchinson: persistent, powerful and savvy.

26. Los Angeles Chargers – A’Mauri Washington, DT, Oregon

For all of the problems that the Bolts are facing with their inability to safeguard Justin Herbert amid season-ending injuries to Rashawn Slater and Joe Alt, their top pick might be better spent fortifying the front on the other side of the ball. Washington offers athleticism seldom seen in a 6-3, 330-pound nose tackle, and his knack for commanding double teams and blowing up plays would change the outlook of a run defense yielding 4.9 yards per carry.

27. Rams – Colton Hood, CB, Tennessee

The Rams are getting by with cornerback Ahkello Witherspoon still on injured reserve with a broken clavicle suffered in Week 2. To truly thrive, though, the Rams should bring aboard a top cover man like Hood, who can help Los Angeles better match up with bulky wideouts.

28. New England Patriots – Denzel Boston, WR, Washington

Drake Maye is hardly hurting in the deep passing game, with his 141.4 passer rating on throws of more than 20 yards ranking second only to Sam Darnold, according to Next Gen Stats. Yet the appeal of pairing the breakout quarterback with a 6-4, 210-pound downfield dynamo in Boston might be too immense for New England to ignore.

29. Seattle Seahawks – Emmanuel Pregnon, G, Oregon

Someone check on John Schneider if he uses consecutive first-round draft picks on offensive guards after taking Grey Zabel this year. Still, this is one of the few problem areas for Seattle’s roster, and Pregnon’s forcefulness would come in handy for an offense still hoping to establish some roots in the ground game.

30. Denver Broncos – Sonny Styles, LB, Ohio State

While it’s still unclear exactly what Denver can expect from Dre Greenlaw, elevating the outlook at linebacker might be one of the few tasks left for a defense adept at smothering all comers. The 6-4, 243-pound Styles stands alone when it comes to athleticism and range among prospects at his position, making him a fun chess piece for whichever defensive coordinator lands him.

31. Philadelphia Eagles – Quincy Rhodes Jr., DE, Arkansas

If Philadelphia holds onto Jaelan Phillips by extending or re-signing the talented trade deadline acquisition, edge rusher plummets down the list of offseason priorities for the defending champs. But if the Eagles are again forced to reload, they’d be wise to take a long look at Rhodes, a tantalizing talent at 6-6 and 275 pounds who has become a mainstay in opponents’ backfields this season.

32. Jets (from Indianapolis Colts) – KC Concepcion, WR, Texas A&M

No matter who is under center for Gang Green in 2026, the passing attack can’t solely be the Garrett Wilson show. After transferring from North Carolina State, Concepcion has demonstrated he can boost any offense with his craftiness in getting open and picking up yards after the catch.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

LAS VEGAS — It was back in May when the narrative spread wildly through baseball that the demise of the AL East was here.

The New York Yankees were the lone team in the entire division that had a winning record on May 6.

The AL East’s magnificent run was finally over.

It turned out to be “Dewey Defeats Truman,’ baseball style.

That was premature, to say the least.

When the regular season ended, the Toronto Blue Jays and New York Yankees were tied for the American League’s best record, the Boston Red Sox had the fourth-best record, and the fourth-place Tampa Bay Rays still outscored their opposition by 31 runs.

“It was the demise of the AL East, right,’ said Erik Neander, Tampa Bay Rays president of baseball operations. “In late April, all you heard was, ‘This division stinks.’ By the end of the year, we are talking about it as being perhaps as good as it’s ever been.’

The AL East ultimately had three postseason teams, including one that came inches short in Game 7 of beating the Los Angeles Dodgers for their first World Series title since 1993.

Now all these teams are eyeing one another at the GM Meetings, wondering what in the world it’s going to take to even survive in 2026.

The Baltimore Orioles, who finished last after making the playoffs two years in a row, are expected to spend more money than perhaps any team in baseball.

The Blue Jays now have become a destination spot that every free agent suddenly finds quite attractive.

The Boston Red Sox have $250 million burning a hole in their pocket after trading All-Star Rafael Devers to the San Francisco Giants last summer.

The Tampa Bay Rays finally have a roof over their head with new ownership hoping primed to find the team a permanent new ballpark.

And the Yankees are well, the Yankees, with expectations to have a payroll of last least $300 million.

What in the world is it like to compete on a daily basis in the AL East?

“It’s invigorating, let’s put in that way,’ said Mike Elias, Baltimore Orioles president of baseball operations. “We have not had any team in the division in a rebuild for a few years now, I guess since we stopped being in a rebuild [in 2021].

“So, you’ve got five teams, five organizations going for it. Two of them are enormous markets. The Blue Jays are a whole country, and the Rays and us are pretty good organizations. And the other three teams are run pretty damn well too. So it’s definitely daunting.

“We like being in the limelight in the AL East. That’s kind of fun. And it sort of, I don’t know, it kind of sharpens your players a little bit. There’s positives to it, but I do think it’s the most consistently challenging division in baseball.’

Orioles rumors: Baltimore finally about to spend?

The Orioles, after paying the price for going cheap and not signing a marquee free-agent starter to replace Corbin Burnes, went just 75-87. They hardly resembled themselves after averaging 96 victories the previous two seasons with back-to-back postseason appearances.

“I mean, last season stunk,’ Elias said. “We were expecting to kind of pick up where we left off and be some type of a playoff team, wild card, win a division, whatever. And very, very little went well. It was really rough for all of us to go through, so we’re motivated to rectify that.’

That involves trades, free agents or perhaps a combination of both. There’s not an agent or rival executive at the GM Meetings who doesn’t believe the Orioles will be big-time buyers this time around, landing one of the marquee free-agent starters.

“We’ll see what happens,’ Elias said. “But since our new ownership group came in, there’s been more payroll available. … The ownership group has a lot of willingness to invest, but also want to win.

“We’re going to go out in the market see what we’re able to do to improve the team. We will be behaving as buyers this season, whether it’s for agency or trade.’

Really, they have no choice if they want to keep up with the Blue Jays, who suddenly are a juggernaut, and scaring the daylights out of everyone else in baseball. They were a classic underachieving team for years in the AL East, finishing last in 2024, only to put it all together – and now look capable of dominating the division for years.

The Blue Jays’ players spent the postseason regaling the media how much they enjoy living in Toronto and extolling the virtues of their close-knit team.

No wonder why the Blue Jays not only are favored to re-sign free agent Bo Bichette, but perhaps become a potential landing spot for outfielder Kyle Tucker or left-hander Framber Valdez and Ranger Suarez.

“There are players that don’t want to play in certain markets for various reasons,’ Blue Jays GM Ross Atkins said, “and we found Toronto to be exceptionally attractive to a large part of the baseball population.’

Atkins also expressed his love for competing in the AL East.

“I can’t say it with more of my heart,’ Atkins says. “It is so fulfilling to be in the AL East, the energy you feel on the road, the way the Al East travels, even in your own home ballpark, and obviously the talent on the field. Just how much every ounce of that division, interleague play matters in the end. The last couple of years have been as strong as ever, in my opinion, and it doesn’t look like that’s changing anytime soon.’

Will Red Sox make free agent splash?

The Red Sox, who have won four World Series titles this century, went through their mild rebuild but also now are built to be a contender. They have plenty of prospects to trade, plenty of money to spend, and a fanbase clamoring to be back atop the baseball world.

“I’m not going to get into specifics of payroll, per se,’ said Craig Breslow, Red Sox president of baseball operations, “but I’ll say that we feel like we have the support, we have the resources, to ensure that we can do the things that allow us to build a team that can improve on what we did in 2025. We had this goal to compete with the division, to make it back to the postseason, to go on a deep postseason run.

“We checked some of those boxes, not all of them.’

The Red Sox are hoping to have a repeat of their dramatic turnaround of a decade ago when they finished last in back-to-back seasons in 2014-2015, only to average 98 victories the next three years with three postseason appearances and a World Series championship.

“Sure, it’s tough,’ Breslow said. “It’s an incredibly competitive division. And every night we’re playing someone in the division that’s got the same aspirations as we do, to make it to the postseason, to go on a deep run. I think we saw that this year with three teams making the postseason, Toronto obviously going on a great run, and we expect that it’s probably going to be even better next year.’’

Certainly, no one in the division expects the Orioles to struggle again in the 2026, believing this past season was simply an aberration. If the Blue Jays can go from last to first, nothing is stopping the Orioles from an encore on their own stage.

“It’s a really talented team,’ Breslow said. “I know Mike very well and how competitive he is, and very confident. You know he’s going to do everything he can to improve the roster.

“When you play against them, it’s not comfortable. You know that they’ve got that really strong core of position players, and you know pitching their pitching was banged up. They’ll be back.’

Rays ready for Tropicana Field return

And so will the Rays, who a year ago had no idea where they’d even play when Tropicana Field had its roof torn to shreds from hurricanes, forcing them to play at the Yankees’ spring-training complex in Tampa.

“I couldn’t be more appreciative of the Yankees offering up Steinbrenner [Field], the accommodations in a really difficult situation,’ Neander said. “I think their generosity, their setup, was the absolute best you could have hoped for, asked for, under the circumstances.

“That being said, it was still very much like sleeping on your friend’s couch rather than living in your own home. …There was never a complaint. Everyone understood that we were there because something was much more important than baseball. And they went about their work all year like true professionals.

“But when you’re not home for that long, it does get a little exhausting. I think we felt it kicked our ass a little bit more than we thought.’

Now, Tropicana Field is opening back up and a new ballpark could be built with new ownership by 2029. Normalcy will never feel so good.

“We’re just looking back to getting into that natural habitat that we’ve enjoyed for so long,’ Neander said. “I’ve heard the words, ‘I miss the Trop’ far more often than the last six months than I probably would have ever expected. But you know, that’s our home. That’s our place. I just think the energy of it, it’ll be helpful to be back there and get back into just a normal routine.’

Yes, back to being a contender and challenging for the AL East title, just like in back in 2019-2023 when they made the postseason five consecutive years, won two division titles and an American League pennant.

“I think you got five teams that are all in our own ways, aiming for a postseason spot,’ Neander said, “and have those expectations. So look, it’s difficult, it’s challenging, and it’s a gauntlet. But that’s a lot of the fun in it. … There’s not a whole lot of margin for error. The division requires you to be your best and bring your best to have a chance to play in October.

“Hopefully there’s some iron sharpening iron within this five-team group here. Just incredible talent. Really well-run organizations. It’s been easy in this division, but we wouldn’t have it any other way.’

Yankees rumors swirl as free agency begins

And, of course, there’s the Yankees. They haven’t had a losing season since 1992. They’ve made the postseason in 26 of the last 31 years. But they just haven’t won a World Series since 2009.

The Yankees want to bring back free agent outfielder Cody Bellinger, making him one of their top priorities. They want to sign at least one more front-line starter with three of their starters opening the season on the injured list. They want bullpen help with four relievers hitting the free-agent market. They want a backup catcher.

“We are always fluid with our payroll situation,’ Yankees GM Brian Cashman said. “Payroll is usually not an issue that we have had to deal much with.’

While Cashman has yet to receive a specific budget from owner Hal Steinbrenner, everybody knows the Yankees can pursue whoever they want.

‘We’re very interested in bringing [Bellinger] back,’ Cashman said. “He’s going to have a lot of choices because he can do a lot of different things. He was a terrific addition for us last year … We’d be better served if we could retain him. But if not, we’ll have to look at alternative ways to fill it and see where that takes us.’

If the Yankees don’t sign everyone they desire, they have to look no further than the Blue Jays for inspiration. The Blue Jays were left at the altar by everyone from Juan Soto to Pete Alonso to Corbin Burnes to Roki Sasaki lastwinter, and they still went from last to first.

“The biggest takeaway I see here, and try to remind our guys,’ Neander said, “is Toronto did all that that on the back of a lot of improvement from players they had in 2024. It’s a reminder that you don’t need to go outside the walls of your group to get better. It can help, obviously, but let’s not wait for anyone to come and join us. Let’s make sure we’re doing the best we can to maximize the group we have.

“We just saw a team in our own division do that very well last year, and they were rewarded.’

See you in 2026, where the AL East will be better, more powerful, and more competitive than ever.

Once again.

Follow Nightengale on X: @Bnightengale

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

LAS VEGAS — Prominent baseball agent Scott Boras, who once again represents several of the marquee players in this year’s free agent class, insisted that no team has expressed hesitation spending this winter market of the potential work stoppage after the 2026 season.

“Historically, we haven’t seen that because teams always want to be their best,’ Boras said. “The bottom line is that teams understand they don’t have to pay players when there are strikes. Our industry over the years, I have never seen the momentum, the international footprint that we have now placed on baseball. …

“We’re doing really, really well our media rights, our media ratings were double that of the NBA championship with the World Series, which says a lot about how we negotiate, knowing that we make half of the NBA and media rights. Something says that we ought to reconsider our methodology as to how we approach it, because the product and the flow of the game has never been better.

“So as far as what they do to continue that flow, I would suggest that the parties understand that the real value and rights in this game is about what media rights the league receives.’

Boras spent 40 minutes extolling the virtues of his free agents and said the Detroit Tigers will keep Cy Young winner Tarik Skubal instead of trading him this winter with one year remaining in free agency. Boras also reiterated they would be open to signing a contract extension, although the price tag certainly would exceed $400 million.

“All we know is that the fans in Detroit want the Tigers to build the Tarik barrack,’ Boras said. “Obviously, everywhere they go, they know it’s Skubal Day, they understand that that that organization is substantially different if he’s not there. And, you know, when you’re in these situations and you go through … and the player hears from the fans, and it’s kind of like it should be ‘Skooby-Done’ not Skooby-Doo.’

Boras also expressed anxiety with MLB’s relationship with gambling sites, saying he’s worried that fans could question the integrity of the game after Cleveland Guardians pitchers Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz were indicted on charges of accepting money to deliberately throw balls instead of strikes on several pitchers.

“I think for players, the concern they have is the integrity,’ Boras said, “where they don’t want to be questioned. What creates question is when a player is out on the mound now, and he is sitting there, and he overthrows a pitch, and it goes 55 feet, you wonder. So you have to create a system that does not allow for such events where they can wage a bet on. You have to remove those prop bets to make sure that the integrity for the players aren’t questioned.’

Here is Boras’ rundown of his top free agents:

Cody Bellinger, outfielder, New York Yankees:

Bellinger opted out of the final $25 million in his contract, and would like to return to the Yankees, where the interest is mutual.

“Really, he’s the only five-tool free agent outfielder,’ Boras said, taking a swipe at free-agent right fielder Kyle Tucker, who’s expected to be the highest-paid this winter. “And when you look at the ‘25 season, I’d say among all the free agent outfielders, he was the top gun of the class. You know, he was certainly a versatile viper, playing both first base, all three outfield positions, and it was kind of offensively a middle lineup Merlin, in the sense that he felt that providing power and production.

“The other thing about Belly is he was kind of unique for a guy his age, under 30, that he’s played in all three markets, LA, Chicago, New York and so really, in many ways, he’s an urban fabric. … When it comes to Bellinger, there’s no question that the teams that have a need, they need to have Belly proceed.’

When asked if Bellinger’s chances of returning to the Yankees could be affected by center fielder Trent Grisham’s decision to accept or reject the $22.05 million qualifying offer, Boras insisted there would be no impact.

“I think the Yankees are looking to improve,’’ Boras said, “not subtract. So since Grisham and Bellinger were both on the team in that year…[no].’’

Alex Bregman, third baseman, Boston Red Sox

Bregman opted out of the final two years, $80 million in his contract. He would like to return to Boston, but the Tigers, who made a strong push for him in free agency last year, also lurk.

“Certainly prior to ‘25 Boston has been a kind of a club that’s been dunking well below the playoff line. So I think it was a bad roast in Beantown,’ Boras said. ‘Give the owners credit in ’25, they went out spent some star bucks to bring in a Bregman blend that led them to the playoffs. So I’m sure the Boston fans don’t want this to be just a cup of coffee, and no one wants a ‘Breg-xit’ ….

“When it comes to leadership, I don’t know of any starting [active] position player that has been in the postseason eight consecutive years. … Bregman went in there with a lot of young players, and in a situation where they were finishing last in their division, and he went in there and created a culture.’

Pete Alonso, first baseman, New York Mets:

Alonso opted out of the one-year, $25 million left on his contract. He would love to spend his entire career with the Mets, but the Mets didn’t sign him until the eve of spring training last year, and are showing no urgency in signing him to a long-term deal now.

“The one thing I think Pete understands that playing in New York is not something most can do,’ Boras said, “to become a star-level player in New York. I think the New York fans recognize it, and they’ve been very, very outward and appreciative of him. He’s an ideal franchise player, plays every day, and it’s clear that the New York fans relate to somebody who is workman-like.’

Max Scherzer, starter, Toronto Blue Jays

Scherzer, 41 signed a one-year, $15.5 million contract last year with the Blue Jays.

Scherzer is expected to sign another one-year, deal, and has not expressed any desire to soon retire.

“I mean, when it’s coming out at 95-96 [mph], and when you go into the playoffs and do what he did,’ Boras said, “it’s really, you know, Maximilian. … it’s not about chronological age to him, it’s about what he can do for a team, what he does in a locker room, the respect he has in the game. He is a remarkably committed performer. … I would expect that he’ll pitch as long as he’s competitive.’

Dylan Cease, starter, San Diego Padres

Cease is expected to be heavily pursued by the Chicago Cubs and Atlanta. “Cease is someone that you go and look at pitchers that can give you 30-plus starts five years in a row, and other than Dylan, they cease to exist. He’s a 200-strikeout guy, a very rare guy in the market. And unlike the other famous Dylan, you know, this one is exclusively electric.’’

Zac Gallen, starter, Arizona Diamondbacks

Gallen is expected to reject his qualifying offer and hit the open market. He’s from Philadelphia, embraces the pressure of pitching back East, and is expected to be strongly pursued by the Mets and possibly the Yankees.

“You really learn after being in these rooms that that the availability of starting pitchers is pint size,’ Boras said. “So we know that a lot of teams are going to be 14-gallon, and so there’s no amount of truth to the idea that Gallen couldn’t fill up a rotation.’

Ranger Suarez, starter, Philadelphia Phillies

Suarez is expected to be one of the highest-paid starters on the open market with teams like the Toronto Blue Jays salivating for a chance to sign him.

“There’s no doubt that anyone that that looks at the playoffs, the last three, four years,’ Boras said, “that Suarez’s playoff quality is, well, frankly, the Lone Ranger in that category. So if you’re interested in acquiring a postseason pitcher that has proven himself, I would suggest you don’t want to miss the Suarez postseason soiree.’

Nick Martinez, starter/reliever, Cincinnati Reds

Martinez was the only player who accepted the $21.05 million qualifying qualifying offer last year from the Reds and will be free of a qualifying offer this time around.

“I think that Nick Martinez can close, he can relieve, and obviously he’s a starting pitcher,’’ Boras said, “so you know he’s, he’s got more gears than an astronomical watch. So he’s a very, very valuable guy that can take this for a team that wants that type of versatility.’’

Tatsuya Imai, starting pitcher, Japan (will be posted Nov. 19)

Imai will be among the top three or four starting pitchers on the market, and certainly is value will be enhanced by Yamamoto’s success with the Dodgers.

“Certainly has done everything that [Yoshinobu] Yamamoto has done in the NPB,’ Boras said, “and does it with a change up more than a splitter. His durability is really of notice. And he’s 27 years old so when most teams talk to me about Imai, they say, “Oh, my!’ He’s that kind of guy. …

“He loves big markets. He is someone who really wants to be on a winning team and compete at the highest level.’

Ha-Seong Kim, shortstop, Atlanta

Kim opted out of the $16 million he was owed in 2026. He was acquired by Atlanta at the trade deadline, who took a $2 million gamble he would stay put after his strong final two months. Atlanta still badly wants him back.

“I think Kim is a hot song on the shortstop charts,’’ Boras said, “no question. I think the availability of defensive premium shortstops in this market is very, very slim. So, if you’re, if you’re looking for a premium defensive shortstop to play, I think it’s HSK.’

Follow Nightengale on X: @Bnightengale

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Development-ready gold asset in premier mining jurisdiction with funded advancement plan; preparing to initiate project-development and exploration drill program

Fortune Bay Corp. (TSXV: FOR,OTC:FTBYF) (FWB: 5QN) (OTCQB: FTBYF) (‘Fortune Bay’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce that, following the completion of its $8 million bought-deal financing, the Company has initiated key technical work streams to advance the Goldfields Project (‘Goldfields’ or the ‘Project’) toward a Pre-Feasibility Study (‘PFS’) in 2026. In parallel, permitting activities are progressing through ongoing baseline environmental studies and planned community consultation. Together, these initiatives build on the strong foundation established by the recently released Updated Preliminary Economic Assessment (‘Updated PEA’), which demonstrated exceptional economics, a streamlined permitting pathway, and a de-risked mineral resource with 97% of ounces in the Indicated category.

Updated PEA Economic Highlights:

  • Leverage to Gold Price: At a spot gold price of US$3,650 per ounce (as of September 19, 2025), the after-tax NPV (5%) increases to C$1.25 billion and the IRR to 74%, generating cumulative after-tax free cash flow of C$1.82 billion.

‘Goldfields stands out as a development-ready gold asset in a premier mining jurisdiction,’ stated Dale Verran, CEO of Fortune Bay. ‘With robust Updated PEA economics, a strong project foundation and now a fully funded advancement plan, we are positioned to unlock meaningful value on multiple fronts. As part of this, we are preparing to commence a drilling program in the coming weeks that will include both project-development drilling to support the PFS and exploration drilling to evaluate resource growth potential. We expect to announce the specific exploration drill targets shortly.’

Studies Toward Pre-Feasibility:

  • Project Development-Related Drilling: Planning of a comprehensive drilling program for Box and Athona is underway. This is being optimized to provide the required drill coverage and core samples to support a PFS for Goldfields. The program will integrate geotechnical study, metallurgical sampling, waste rock study and groundwater investigations, aimed to minimize the amount of drilling required to the extent possible. Project development-related drilling is expected to be run in conjunction with an exploration drilling program for efficiency and is expected to begin in the coming weeks.
  • Waste Rock Characterization: The Company has initiated an analytical testing program and a suite of samples, representing the dominant lithological units in the Box and Athona waste rock material, have been collected and are being exported from site for Acid Base Accounting, metal geochemistry and shake flask extraction testing. Results of this work will inform subsequent mineralogical and kinetic waste rock humidity cell testing. All analyses will be carried out by SGS Canada – Lakefield laboratory in Ontario. The results of this study will be used to inform forward planning and sampling during upcoming drilling and will also be used to develop waste rock and water management plans.
  • Metallurgical Testwork: A testwork program is currently underway at the SGS Canada – Lakefield laboratory in Ontario. A representative sample of mineralization from the Box deposit is being tested to supplement work carried out in 2015 and properly constrain what percentage gold can be recovered into a concentrate with the minimum possible mass draw through a combination of gravity and two-pass floatation. Results are expected in early December, and these will inform decision making about project scope and additional metallurgical testing for advancement through PFS.
  • High-Resolution Topographic Survey: A fixed-wing airborne LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) survey was carried out at Goldfields in October 2025 to generate high-resolution topographic data to support more detailed engineering studies during PFS. The survey, carried out over the entire project footprint area as proposed in the Updated PEA with additional buffer, was completed by KBM Geomatics of Thunder Bay, Ontario. Deliverables are expected in November 2025.

Permitting Activities, Community Consultation and Regulatory Engagement:

  • Aquatic Surveys: Completed in September 2025 by Ecometrix Inc. of Mississauga, Ontario. Initial reporting on aquatic habitat studies and fishing results is expected in December 2025, with full reporting including laboratory analysis expected in early 2026.
  • Terrestrial Surveys: Initiated in August 2025 by Omnia Ecological Services of Calgary, Alberta. This included ecological land classification studies and deployment of cameras and acoustic survey units. Follow up field work was completed in October 2025, collecting a first round of data from all survey equipment, which remain deployed in the field. Initial reporting on findings is expected in December 2025, with survey work ongoing in 2026.
  • Planned Regulatory Engagement: Results from baseline environmental studies and waste rock characterization work mentioned above will be integrated with feedback from early consultation and will be used as a basis for initiation of regulatory engagement and the submission of a Technical Proposal to the Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment in Q1 of 2026. This work will build upon the Provincially-approved 2008 Environmental Impact Statement for a 5,000 tpd open-pit operation.

Qualified Person & Technical Report

Details for the Updated PEA for Goldfields are provided in the technical report titled ‘Goldfields Project Updated NI 43-101 Technical Report & Preliminary Economic Assessment, Saskatchewan, Canada‘, dated October 20, 2025, prepared by Kevin Murray, P.Eng.; Scott C. Elfen, P.E.; James Millard, P.Geo.; Jonathan Cooper, P.Eng.; Marc Schulte, P.Eng.; Cliff Revering, P.Eng.; and Ron Uken, Pr.Sci.Nat. for Fortune Bay Corp. The technical report is available under the Company’s issuer profile on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca) and on the Company’s website at www.fortunebaycorp.com.

The technical and scientific information in this news release has been reviewed and approved by Gareth Garlick P.Geo., Vice-President Technical Services of the Company, who is a Qualified Person as defined by NI 43-101. Mr. Garlick is an employee of Fortune Bay and is not independent of the Company under NI 43‑101.

About Goldfields

The 100% owned Goldfields Project (‘Goldfields’ or the ‘Project’) is located approximately 13 kilometres south of Uranium City, Saskatchewan. Goldfields hosts the Box and Athona gold deposits, as well as additional gold showings within the prospective Goldfields Syncline. The Box deposit was historically mined underground between 1939 and 1942, producing 64,000 ounces of gold. The Project is located within a historical mining area and benefits from established infrastructure, including a road and hydro-powerline to the Box deposit. Nearby facilities and services in Uranium City include bulk fuel, civils contractors, and a commercial airport.

About Fortune Bay

Fortune Bay Corp. (TSXV:FOR,OTC:FTBYF; FWB:5QN; OTCQB:FTBYF) is a gold exploration and development company advancing high-potential assets in Canada and Mexico. With a strategy focused on discovery, resource growth and early-stage development, the Company targets value creation at the steepest part of the Value Creation Curve—prior to the capital-intensive build phase. Its portfolio includes the development-ready Goldfields Project in Saskatchewan, the resource-expansion Poma Rosa Project in Mexico, and two optioned Athabasca Basin uranium portfolios providing non-dilutive capital and upside exposure. Backed by a technically proven team and tight capital structure, Fortune Bay is positioned for multiple near-term catalysts. For more information, visit www.fortunebaycorp.com or contact info@fortunebaycorp.com.

On behalf of Fortune Bay Corp.

‘Dale Verran’
Chief Executive Officer
902-334-1919

Cautionary Statement

Information set forth in this news release contains forward-looking statements that are based on assumptions as of the date of this news release. These statements reflect management’s current estimates, beliefs, intentions, and expectations. They are not guarantees of future performance. Words such as ‘expects’, ‘aims’, ‘anticipates’, ‘targets’, ‘goals’, ‘projects’, ‘intends’, ‘plans’, ‘believes’, ‘seeks’, ‘estimates’, ‘continues’, ‘may’, variations of such words, and similar expressions and references to future periods, are intended to identify such forward-looking statements, and include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to: the results of the Updated PEA, including future Project opportunities, future operating and capital costs, closure costs, AISC, the projected NPV, IRR, timelines, permit timelines, and the ability to obtain the requisite permits, economics and associated returns of the Project, the technical viability of the Project, the market and future price of and demand for gold, the environmental impact of the Project, and the ongoing ability to work cooperatively with stakeholders, including Indigenous Nations, local Municipalities and local levels of government. Since forward-looking statements are based on assumptions and address future events and conditions, by their very nature they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Although these statements are based on information currently available to the Company, the Company provides no assurance that actual results will meet management’s expectations. Risks, uncertainties and other factors involved with forward- looking information could cause actual events, results, performance, prospects and opportunities to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Forward looking information in this news release includes, but is not limited to, the Company’s objectives, goals or future plans, statements, exploration results, potential mineralization, the estimation of mineral resources, exploration and mine development plans, timing of the commencement of operations and estimates of market conditions. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking information include, but are not limited to failure to identify mineral resources, failure to convert estimated mineral resources to reserves, the inability to complete a feasibility study which recommends a production decision, the preliminary nature of metallurgical test results, delays in obtaining or failures to obtain required governmental, environmental or other project approvals, political risks, inability to fulfill the duty to accommodate Indigenous Nations and local Municipalities, uncertainties relating to the availability and costs of financing needed in the future, changes in equity markets, inflation, changes in exchange rates, fluctuations in commodity prices, delays in the development of projects, capital and operating costs varying significantly from estimates and the other risks involved in the mineral exploration and development industry, and those risks set out in the Company’s public documents filed on SEDAR. Although the Company believes that the assumptions and factors used in preparing the forward-looking information in this news release are reasonable, undue reliance should not be placed on such information, which only applies as of the date of this news release, and no assurance can be given that such events will occur in the disclosed time frames or at all. The Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by law. For more information on Fortune Bay, readers should refer to Fortune Bay’s website at www.fortunebaycorp.com.

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

SOURCE Fortune Bay Corp.

View original content to download multimedia: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/November2025/12/c0872.html

News Provided by Canada Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Discovery of uranium mineralization in ideal geological setting, supported by regional radiometric anomaly, confirms large Rossing-style target

ReeXploration Inc. (TSXV: REE) (FSE: K2I0) (‘ReeXploration’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce the identification of a significant new uranium exploration target at its Eureka Project (‘Eureka’ or the ‘Project’), located in the Erongo mining district, central Namibia. This new uranium target supports the Company’s broader focus on advancing critical-mineral opportunities in stable, mining-friendly jurisdictions.

HIGHLIGHTS:

  • New Large-Scale Uranium Target Identified: Immediately southwest of the Eureka Dome, which hosts the Company’s rare earth element (‘REE’) resource and numerous REE targets.
  • Strong Regional Radiometric Anomaly: Airborne data defines a 6.5 x 3.5 km zone characterized by high uranium and low thorium responses.
  • Evidence of Widespread Uranium Mineralization: Uranium reported in shallow overburden samples from historical exploration, verified by recent scintillometer readings up to 1,500 counts per second (‘cps’).
  • Uranium Discovered in Weathered Leucogranites: Field reconnaissance confirmed elevated uranium in occasionally outcropping leucogranites (‘alaskites’), with portable XRF semiquantitative values up to 853 ppm U.
  • Along Trend of Namibia’s ‘Alaskite Alley’: Lies within the same structural corridor that hosts major uranium deposits — Rössing, Husab, Etango, Omaholo, and Norasa — which collectively contain more than 1 billion pounds of U₃O₈.
  • Geological Setting Matches Rössing-Style Models: Key discovery criteria evident, including 1) proximity to the Welwitschia Lineament, 2) position on the flanks of a major basement dome, and 3) leucogranites intruded into reactive calc-silicate host rocks.

‘This uranium target, which is almost entirely covered by thin overburden, represents a promising exploration opportunity within one of the world’s most prolific uranium belts,’ commented Tolene Kruger, Senior Geologist for ReeXploration. ‘The geology, structural setting, and early results are consistent with the deposit models that led to the discovery of the major leucogranite-hosted uranium deposits within Namibia.’

Christopher Drysdale, Interim CEO for ReeXploration, added ‘The identification of this new target highlights the strong technical work completed by our exploration team and the expanded potential of the Eureka Project. As we continue to advance with our REE resource growth plan within the Eureka Dome, this extensive target immediately outside the Dome adds significant exploration upside and optionality for our shareholders, in one of the world’s most established critical minerals mining jurisdictions. We are looking forward to advancing exploration on our numerous REE targets and this newly identified uranium target, consistent with our strategy to discover significant critical mineral resources that contribute to secure, responsible supply chains.’

Expanded Discovery Potential – Large-Scale Rössing-Style Target

The identification of this target underscores the exceptional potential of the Eureka Project, which now includes a growing pipeline of REE targets alongside this newly recognized uranium opportunity. Review and field validation of government airborne radiometric data revealed extensive uranium anomalies situated off the southwestern margin of the Eureka Dome, which is host to the Company’s REE mineral resources and exploration targets. The government airborne radiometric data shows large-scale uranium anomalies 6.5 x 3.5 kilometres in extent with high uranium and low thorium – characteristic signature for Rössing-style targets (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Company license holding showing REE targets within the Eureka Dome, and high uranium anomalies outlined in red on uranium radiometric (government airborne radiometrics) backdrop. Insert: Thorium radiometric backdrop showing low thorium relative to the uranium anomalies.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/6102/274096_b3f40910c437995f_001full.jpg

Located Along Trend of Namibia’s Renowned Alaskite Alley

The new uranium target at Eureka is situated along trend of Namibia’s ‘Alaskite Alley’, a structural corridor within Namibia’s Central Zone of the Damara Belt that hosts multiple giant uranium deposits hosted within leucogranites, including Rössing, Husab, Etango, Omaholo and Norasa (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Regional satellite view showing the position of the uranium anomalies southwest of the Eureka Dome, and their proximity to the Welwitschia Lineament and other large uranium deposits in Alaskite Alley.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/6102/274096_b3f40910c437995f_002full.jpg

Key Geological Criteria Consistent with Major Uranium Deposits

The target exhibits all the key geological criteria consistent with the major uranium deposit models, including (Figure 3):

  • Proximity to the Welwitschia Lineament – a major crustal-scale structure, central to ‘Alaskite Alley’, interpreted to have played a key role in localizing uranium-bearing leucogranite intrusions throughout the district.
  • The Welwitschia Lineament is located immediately east of the new uranium target at Eureka.

  • An Older Basement Dome – that provides the structural architecture for the emplacement of uranium-rich leucogranites around dome margins.
  • The Eureka Dome is mapped as the same formation as the Rössing Dome (Etusis Formation).
  • Reactive Contact Rocks – typically calc-silicate lithologies (metasediments) which act as chemical traps promoting uranium precipitation.
  • Calc-silicates are mapped flanking the Eureka Dome (Arandis Formation).
  • The Presence of Leucogranites – late-stage magmatic intrusions which host uranium mineralization in Rössing-style deposits.
  • Significant leucogranites are interpreted to exist below the thin overburden at Eureka as sheeted dykes intercalated between calc-silicates, as evidenced by occasional weathered leucogranite outcrop.

Figure 3: Comparison between the major uranium deposits in Alaskite Alley and the airborne uranium anomalies southwest of the Eureka Dome.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/6102/274096_b3f40910c437995f_003full.jpg

Initial Field Reconnaissance Supports Potential for Rössing-Style Deposit

Field spectrometer prospecting conducted by the Company has confirmed the regional scale of the airborne radiometric uranium anomalies. The anomalies relate to widespread uranium mineralization occurring within thin overburden, which is best visible where drainages have incised a regionally occurring gypcrete/calcrete horizon with anomalous values ranging from 300 to 1,500 counts per second (‘cps’) (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Photographs taken during reconnaissance field work and ground spectrometer survey within the anomalous areas.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/6102/274096_b3f40910c437995f_004full.jpg

The uranium mineralization within the overburden is potentially indicative of extensive uranium mineralization within the underlying leucogranites, supported by (Figure 5):

  1. Discovery of secondary uranium mineralization (carnotite) within weathered/leached leucogranites— pXRF semiquantitative values of up to 853 ppm U.

  2. Abundant ‘smokey’ or irradiated quartz within the leucogranites.

  3. Spectrometer evidence of uranium enrichment of weathered leucogranites where in contact with chemically-reactive calc-silicates.

Figure 5: Mineralized leucogranite found during reconnaissance field work and the ground spectrometer survey.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/6102/274096_b3f40910c437995f_005full.jpg

Historical Work Focused on Shallow Overburden Mineralization

Although the target is on trend with Namibia’s Alaskite Alley, its position farther north, together with the thin overburden and the presence of calc-silicates belonging to the Arandis rather than the Khan Formation, likely contributed to the lack of focused historical exploration. Despite the highly favorable geological setting, the target appears to remain largely untested.

Historical uranium exploration at Eureka—outside of the main Eureka Dome and then held under EPL 3637—was primarily directed toward near-surface secondary uranium (carnotite) mineralization hosted within calcrete and gypcrete horizons. While historical work confirmed the presence of leucogranites intruding calc-silicate rocks, these potential bedrock sources were evidently not systematically drill-tested at any depth.

The work completed in 2009 consisted mainly of shallow pitting and percussion drilling (<5 m depth) designed to evaluate surface uranium enrichment in the search for calcrete-hosted (paleochannel-type) uranium deposits such as Langer Heinrich, leaving the primary leucogranite targets effectively untested. Across the broader Eureka license area, historical work included 100 prospecting pits (to 1.8 m depth, averaging 1.3 m) and 139 rotary air-blast (RAB) drill holes totaling only 803 m (i.e. average depth of only 5.8 m). Visible carnotite mineralization was reported in several pits, with uranium values up to 192 ppm U₃O₈ over 1.18 m, confirming uranium enrichment within the overburden and weathered bedrock. Preliminary, non-NI 43-101-compliant historical estimates indicated approximately 600,000 lbs U₃O₈ at 70 ppm within the overburden gycretes and calcretes (see Technical Disclosure below in reference to this historical resource estimate).

Despite best efforts, the Company has been unable to locate additional drill data or records. The summary descriptions provided in the available report suggest that systematic testing of deeper bedrock targets was never completed. This provides a significant opportunity to evaluate the potential for Rössing-style, leucogranite-hosted uranium mineralization beneath the thin overburden.

Drill Testing Warranted Below the Weathering Profile

Given the apparent shallow nature of the historical drilling, any testing of the underlying leucogranite units would have been very limited or non-existent, with exploration evidently focused on surface and near-surface mineralization within the overburden. The highly weathered nature of the limited leucogranite outcrop indicates that leaching has occurred near-surface, and as a result, leucogranites found at surface would not be expected to be mineralized other than possible secondary mineralization (carnotite) — as discovered from initial field reconnaissance. Drilling below the weathering profile is required to test for primary leucogranite-hosted mineralization (uraninite), typical of Rössing-style deposits.

Technical Disclosure

The historical exploration results and historical resource estimate summarized herein are considered historical in nature and have not been verified by the Company’s Qualified Person as defined under National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (‘NI 43-101’). These results, including the historical resource estimate, are sourced from Wartha, R.R. (2009). 2009 Annual Technical Report – EPL 3637 (Ancash Investment (Pty) Ltd.), prepared for Valencia Uranium (Pty) Ltd., December 18, 2009. The approximate historical resource estimate was calculated using an area of 1.5 million m2 and an average mineralized thickness of 1 to 2 metres within the overburden gycretes and calcretes providing approximately 3.9 million tonnes of mineralization at 70 ppm, totaling in 600,000 lbs of U₃O₈. The historical resource categories used in the estimate do not conform to the current CIM Definition Standards and should not be compared directly to current mineral resource categories. The Company is not aware of any more recent mineral resource estimates for the Property. A Qualified Person has not completed sufficient work to verify the historical estimate or to classify it as a current mineral resource, and the Company is not treating the historical estimate as a current mineral resource. To verify and upgrade the historical estimate, additional work will be required, including data verification, review of historical drilling and sampling QA/QC, updated geological modeling, and completion of a new mineral resource estimate in accordance with NI 43-101 and CIM Definition Standards.

Field analysis of rock samples was carried out using a calibrated SciAps X-555 portable X-Ray Fluorescence (pXRF) analyzer. The instrument is capable of detecting uranium providing a rapid, preliminary, and semi-quantitative indication of uranium concentrations which is considered sufficiently reliable for initial reporting of initial field reconnaissance results. Samples are expected to be verified through uranium assay at an accredited laboratory.

Counts per second (‘cps’) results were collected using an RS-125 handheld gamma-ray spectrometer. The RS-125 measures natural radioactivity from potassium (K), uranium (U), and thorium (Th), providing real-time counts-per-second (cps) readings that assist in identifying zones of elevated radioactivity and guiding geological mapping and sampling programs. The cps measurements are qualitative in nature and should not be interpreted as equivalent to uranium concentrations obtained through laboratory analysis.

Qualified Person

Tolene Kruger, BSc. (Hons), M.Sc., is a consulting geologist and has reviewed and approved the scientific and technical information in this news release. Mrs. Kruger is registered as Professional Natural Scientist (Pr.Sci.Nat.) with the South African Council for Natural Science Professions (SACNASP, Reg. No.: 148182), and a Qualified Person for the purposes of National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects. Ms. Kruger is not independent of the Company under NI 43-101.

About ReeXploration Inc.

ReeXploration (TSXV: REE) (FSE: K2I0) is a Canadian exploration company positioned to help meet surging global demand for secure, responsible supplies of critical minerals essential to the clean energy transition, advanced technologies and national defense. The company’s flagship Eureka Project in central Namibia hosts rare earth element (REE) mineralization in monazite, rich in NdPr magnet metals, with bench-scale testing confirming production of a clean, Western-standard concentrate. Supported by a Namibia-based technical team and guided by global critical minerals experts, ReeXploration is advancing discovery-led growth for rare earth elements (REEs) and other critical minerals, building a credible, ESG-aligned platform positioned to benefit from the global race to diversify and secure responsible supply chains.

Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This press release may contain forward-looking information. This information is based on current expectations and assumptions (including assumptions relating to general economic and market conditions) that are subject to significant risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Actual results may differ materially from results suggested in any forward-looking information. ReeXploration does not assume any obligation to update forward-looking information in this release, or to update the reasons why actual results could differ from those reflected in the forward-looking information unless and until required by securities laws applicable to ReeXploration. Additional information identifying risks and uncertainties is contained in the filings made by ReeXploration with Canadian securities regulators, which filings are available at www.sedarplus.ca.

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

Further details are available on the Corporation’s website at www.rareearthexploration.com or contact Christopher Drysdale, Interim CEO of ReeXploration Inc., at +1 902-334-1949, contact@rareearthexploration.com.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/274096

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Osisko Metals Incorporated (the ‘ Company or ‘ Osisko Metals ‘) ( TSX: OM,OTC:OMZNF ; OTCQX: OMZNF ; FRANKFURT: 0B51 ) is pleased to announce new drill results from the Gaspé Copper Project, located in the Gaspé Peninsula of Eastern Québec.

New analytical results are presented below (see Table 1), including 35 mineralized intercepts from ten new drill holes. Infill intercepts are located inside the 2024 MRE model ( see November 14, 2024 news release ), and are focused on upgrading inferred mineral resources to measured or indicated categories, as applicable. Expansion intercepts are located outside the 2024 MRE model and may potentially lead to additional resources that will be classified appropriately within the next MRE update. Some of the reported intercepts have contiguous shallower infill as well as deeper expansion (noted on Table 1 below as ‘Both’). Maps showing hole locations are available at www.osiskometals.com .

Highlights:

  • Drill hole 30-1128
    • 330.6 metres averaging 0.46% Cu (0.49% CuEq – expansion)
  • Drill hole 30-1115
    • 33.0 metres averaging 1.28% Cu (1.36% CuEq – expansion)
  • Drill hole 30-1117
    • 779.0 metres averaging 0.26% Cu (0.34% CuEq – infill and expansion)
  • Drill hole 30-1118
    • 555.9 metres averaging 0.20% Cu (0.26% CuEq – infill)
  • Drill hole 30-1123
    • 313.5 metres averaging 0.23% Cu (0.28% CuEq – infill and expansion)
    • 220.5 metres averaging 0.20% Cu (0.30% CuEq – expansion)
  • Drill hole 30-1125
    • 293.0 metres averaging 0.23% Cu (0.30% CuEq – expansion)
  • Drill hole 30-1126
    • 804.0 metres averaging 0.24% Cu (0.31% CuEq – infill and expansion)
  • Drill hole 30-1130
    • 347.7 metres averaging 0.24% Cu (0.29% CuEq – infill)
  • Drill hole 30-1131
    • 714.0 metres averaging 0.21% Cu (0.27% CuEq – both)

Table 1: Infill and Expansion Drilling Results

DDH No. From (m) To (m) Length (m) Cu % Ag g/t Mo % CuEq* Type**
30-1115 499.5 532.5 33.0 1.28 8.89 0.009 1.36 Expansion
And 661.5 717.6 56.1 0.59 3.52 <0.005 0.61 Expansion
30-1117 21.0 45.0 24.0 0.24 1.79 <0.005 0.25 Infill
And 149.0 161.0 12.0 0.17 1.84 0.016 0.24 Infill
And 212.5 991.5 779.0 0.26 1.68 0.019 0.34 Both
(including) 212.5 679.0 466.5 0.22 1.44 0.018 0.29 Infill
(including) 679.0 991.5 312.5 0.32 2.04 0.019 0.41 Expansion
30-1118 17.1 573.0 555.9 0.20 1.00 0.008 0.26 Infill
And 624.0 775.5 151.5 0.11 0.77 0.027 0.21 Expansion
30-1123 23.0 59.0 36.0 0.28 2.19 <0.005 0.30 Infill
And 72.0 107.0 35.0 0.19 1.93 <0.005 0.20 Infill
And 123.0 137.0 14.0 0.13 2.04 <0.005 0.14 Infill
And 213.0 526.5 313.5 0.23 1.84 0.012 0.28 Both
(including) 213.0 443.0 230.0 0.24 1.94 0.011 0.29 Infill
(including) 443.0 526.5 83.5 0.20 1.57 0.017 0.27 Expansion
And 553.5 774.0 220.5 0.20 1.63 0.024 0.30 Expansion
30-1125 15.3 199.5 184.2 0.20 0.97 <0.005 0.21 Infill
And 255.0 288.0 33.0 0.12 1.10 0.008 0.14 Infill
And 304.5 335.0 30.5 0.14 0.65 0.009 0.18 Infill
And 356.6 531.7 175.1 0.15 0.98 0.019 <0.005 Infill
And 643.0 936.0 293.0 0.23 1.26 0.019 0.30 Expansion
30-1126 72.0 204.0 132.0 0.13 1.05 0.005 0.15 Infill
And 229.5 1033.5 804.0 0.24 1.48 0.016 0.31 Both
(including) 229.5 634.1 404.6 0.24 1.81 0.017 0.32 Infill
(including) 634.1 1033.5 399.4 0.24 1.15 0.015 0.30 Expansion
30-1127 5.0 24.0 19.0 0.16 2.31 <0.005 0.18 Infill
And 107.0 124.0 17.0 0.30 3.53 0.005 0.33 Infill
And 255.0 284.2 29.2 0.28 2.66 0.012 0.34 Infill
And 328.5 370.5 42.0 0.21 1.84 0.008 0.25 Infill
And 476.5 493.5 17.0 0.19 1.46 <0.005 0.21 Infill
And 546.0 591.0 45.0 0.56 3.46 0.046 0.75 Infill
And 807.9 833.0 25.1 0.53 2.79 <0.005 0.56 Expansion
And 864.0 891.0 27.0 0.40 2.46 <0.005 0.42 Expansion
30-1128 8.0 32.0 24.0 0.18 2.48 <0.005 0.19 Expansion
And 44.0 58.0 14.0 0.21 2.01 <0.005 0.22 Expansion
And 78.0 193.5 115.5 0.44 3.67 0.008 0.49 Expansion
And 225.0 555.6 330.6 0.46 4.33 <0.005 0.49 Expansion
(including) 392.0 406.5 14.5 2.51 24.9 <0.005 2.66 Expansion
30-1130 5.0 18.0 13.0 0.19 2.09 <0.005 0.21 Infill
And 168.0 515.7 347.7 0.24 2.14 0.010 0.29 Infill
And 610.5 888.0 277.5 0.26 1.51 0.023 0.35 Infill
30-1131 27.0 741.0 714.0 0.21 1.11 0.015 0.27 Both

* See explanatory notes below on copper equivalent values and Quality Assurance/Quality Controls.
** ‘Both’ indicates drill holes that have contiguous shallower infill as well as deeper expansion intercepts.

Discussion

Drill hole 30-1115, located on the eastern margin of the 2024 MRE model, did not intersect significant mineralization to a depth of 499 metres, but cut relatively high grades of 33.0 metres averaging 1.28 % Cu, 8.89 g/t Ag within the C Zone skarn horizon (expansion), as well as 56.1 metres averaging 0.59 % Cu and 3.52 g/t Ag, above the E Zone skarn horizon. The hole ended in an E zone stope where massive sulfides and high-grade skarns were previously mined.

Drill hole 30-1117, located on the western flank of Copper Mountain, cut three mineralized intervals including 779.0 metres averaging 0.26 % Cu, 1.68 g/t Ag and 0.019% Mo (which includes 312.5 metres of depth expansion), extending mineralization in this area to a vertical depth of 991 metres.

Drill hole 30-1118, located near the southern lip of the Copper Mountain open pit, cut two mineralized intervals including 555.9 metres averaging 0.20 % Cu, 1.00 g/t Ag and 0.008% Mo (infill) as well as a deeper intersection of 151.5 metres averaging 0.11 % Cu, 0.77 g/t Ag and 0.027% Mo (expansion), extending mineralization in this area to a vertical depth of 776 metres.

Drill hole 30-1123, located on the southern flank of Copper Mountain, cut three mineralized intersections, 14 to 36 metres thick and distributed in ‘layer cake’ fashion from surface to a vertical depth of 137 metres, followed by 313.5 metres averaging 0.23 % Cu, 1.84 g/t Ag and 0.012% Mo (infill and expansion) and then by 220.5 metres averaging 0.20 % Cu, 1.63 g/t Ag and 0.024% Mo (expansion), extending mineralization in this area to a vertical depth of 774 metres.

Drill hole 30-1125, located approximately 200 metres south of 30-1118, near Copper Brook, cut five mineralized intersections, 30 to 293 metres thick and distributed in ‘layer cake’ fashion from surface to a vertical depth of 936 metres, including 184.2 metres averaging 0.20 % C and 0.97 g/t Ag (infill) as well as 293.0 metres averaging 0.23 % Cu, 1.26 g/t Ag and 0.019% Mo (expansion).

Drill hole 30-1126, located on the western flank of Copper Mountain, cut two mineralized intervals including 804.0 metres averaging 0.24 % Cu, 1.48 g/t Ag and 0.016% Mo (which includes 399.4 metres of depth expansion), extending mineralization in this area to a vertical depth of 1033 metres.

Drill hole 30-1127, located near the eastern margin of the 2024 MRE model, cut eight intersections of mineralization, 17 to 45 metres thick and distributed in ‘layer cake’ fashion from surface to a vertical depth of 891 metres, confirming the near limit of the 2024 MRE model at this location.

Drill hole 30-1128, located 100 metres south of the southern margin of the 2024 MRE model, cut four mineralized intersections, all expansion outside the current resource model, including 115.5 metres averaging 0.44 % Cu and 3.67 g/t Ag within (and above) the B Zone skarn horizon, as well as 330.6 metres averaging 0.46 % Cu and 4.33 g/t Ag from the top of the C Zone skarn to well below (120 metres) the E zone horizon. This latter intersection included a high-grade interval of 14.5 metres averaging 2.51 % Cu and 24.9 g/t Ag, located in a mineralized vein/massive sulfide zone about 20 metres above the E Zone horizon. This is a new mineralized zone not previously identified at Gaspé Copper and its extent is presently unknown.

Drill hole 30-1130, located on top of Copper Mountain near the center of the 2024 MRE model, cut two significant mineralized intervals including 347.7 metres averaging 0.24 % Cu, 2.14 g/t Ag and 0.010% Mo, followed by 277.5 metres averaging 0.26% Cu, 1.51 g/t Ag and 0.023% Mo, extending mineralization in this area to a vertical depth of 874 metres.

Drill hole 30-1131, located near the southern lip of the Copper Mountain open pit adjacent to 30-1118, was drilled at a 78-degree dip towards the north and it intersected 741 metres of continuous mineralization from surface, averaging 0.21 % Cu, 1.11 g/t Ag and 0.015% Mo (infill). This hole confirmed mineralization in this area to a vertical depth of 725 metres, ending in the porphyry intrusion core of the Copper Mountain deposit.

Mineralization at Gaspé Copper is of porphyry copper/skarn type and occurs as disseminations and stockworks of chalcopyrite with pyrite or pyrrhotite and minor bornite and molybdenite. One prograde and at least five retrograde vein/stockwork mineralizing events have been recognized at Copper Mountain, which overprint earlier, bedding replacement skarn and porcellanite-hosted mineralization throughout the Gaspé Copper system. Porcellanite is a historical mining term used to describe bleached, pale green to white potassic-altered hornfels. Subvertical stockwork mineralization dominates at Copper Mountain whereas prograde bedding-parallel mineralization, that is mostly stratigraphically controlled, dominates in the area of lower Copper Mountain, Needle Mountain, Needle East, and Copper Brook. High molybdenum grades (up to 0.5% Mo) were locally obtained in both the C Zone and E Zone skarns away from Copper Mountain.

The 2022 to 2024 Osisko Metals drill programs were focused on defining open-pit resources within the Copper Mountain stockwork mineralization ( see May 6, 2024 MRE press release ). Extending the resource model south of Copper Mountain into the poorly-drilled prograde skarn/porcellanite portion of the system subsequently led to a significantly increased resource, mostly in the Inferred category ( see November 14, 2024 MRE press release ).

The current drill program is designed to convert the November 2024 MRE to Measured and Indicated categories, as well as test the expansion of the system deeper into the stratigraphy and laterally to the south and southwest towards Needle East and Needle Mountain respectively. The November 2024 MRE was limited at depth to the base of the L1 skarn horizon (C Zone), and all mineralized intersections below this horizon represent potential depth extensions to the deposit, to be included in the next scheduled MRE update in Q1 2026.

Most holes are being drilled sub-vertically into the altered calcareous stratigraphy which dips 20 to 25 degrees to the north. The L1 (C Zone) the L2 (E Zone) skarn/marble horizons were intersected in most holes, as well as intervening porcellanites that host the bulk of the disseminated copper mineralization.

Table 2: Drill hole locations

DDH No. Azimuth (°) Dip (°) Length (m) UTM E UTM N Elevation
30-1115 0.0 -90.0 723.6 316600.0 5426109.0 612.4
30-1117 0.0 -90.0 1014.0 315811.0 5426424.0 695.7
30-1118 0.0 -90.0 780.0 315612.0 5426495.0 580.2
30-1123 0.0 -90.0 894.0 316136.0 5425972.8 621.3
30-1125 0.0 -90.0 972.0 315608.0 5426313.0 580.0
30-1126 0.0 -90.0 1080.9 315800.0 5426321.0 651.9
30-1127 0.0 -90.0 1029.0 316500.0 5426171.0 647.8
30-1128 90.0 -88.0 675.0 316277.0 5425557.0 566.5
30-1130 345.0 -80.0 888.0 316194.0 5426387.0 746.0
30-1131 355.0 -78.0 741.0 315612.0 5426495.0 583.0


Explanatory note regarding copper-equivalent grades

Copper Equivalent grades are expressed for purposes of simplicity and are calculated taking into account: 1) metal grades; 2) estimated long-term prices of metals: US$4.25/lb copper, $20.00/lb molybdenum, and US$24/oz silver; 3) estimated recoveries of 92%, 70%, and 70% for Cu, Mo, and Ag respectively; and 4) net smelter return value of metals as percentage of the price, estimated at 86.5%, 90.7%, and 75.0% for Cu, Mo, and Ag respectively.

Qualified Person

The scientific and technical content of this news release has been reviewed and approved by Mr. Bernard-Olivier Martel, P. Geo. (OGQ 492), an independent ‘qualified person’ as defined by National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (‘NI 43-101’).

Quality Assurance / Quality Control

Mineralized intervals reported herein are calculated using an average 0.12% CuEq lower cut-off over contiguous 20-metre intersections (shorter intervals as the case may be at the upper and lower limits of reported intervals). Intervals of 10 metres or less are not reported unless indicating significantly higher grades .   True widths are estimated at 90 – 92% of the reported core length intervals.

Osisko Metals adheres to a strict QA/QC program for core handling, sampling, sample transportation and analyses, including insertion of blanks and standards in the sample stream. Drill core is drilled in HQ or NQ diameter and securely transported to its core processing facility on site, where it is logged, cut and sampled. Samples selected for assay are sealed and shipped to ALS Canada Ltd.’s preparation facility in Sudbury. Sample preparation details (code PREP-31DH) are available on the ALS Canada website. Pulps are analyzed at the ALS Canada Ltd. facility in North Vancouver, BC. All samples are analyzed by four acid digestion followed by both ICP-AES and ICP-MS for Cu, Mo and Ag.

About Osisko Metals

Osisko Metals Incorporated is a Canadian exploration and development company creating value in the critical metals sector, with a focus on copper and zinc. The Company acquired a 100% interest in the past-producing Gaspé Copper mine from Glencore Canada Corporation in July 2023. The Gaspé Copper mine is located near Murdochville in Québec s Gaspé Peninsula. The Company is currently focused on resource expansion of the Gaspé Copper system, with current Indicated Mineral Resources of 824 Mt averaging 0.34% CuEq and Inferred Mineral Resources of 670 Mt averaging 0.38% CuEq (in compliance with NI 43-101). For more information, see Osisko Metals’ November 14, 2024 news release entitled ‘Osisko Metals Announces Significant Increase in Mineral Resource at Gaspé Copper’. Gaspé Copper hosts the largest undeveloped copper resource in eastern North America, strategically located near existing infrastructure in the mining-friendly province of Québec.

In addition to the Gaspé Copper project, the Company is working with Appian Capital Advisory LLP through the Pine Point Mining Limited joint venture to advance one of Canada s largest past-producing zinc mining camps, the Pine Point project, located in the Northwest Territories. The current mineral resource estimate for the Pine Point project consists of Indicated Mineral Resources of 49.5 Mt averaging 5.52% ZnEq and Inferred Mineral Resources of 8.3 Mt averaging 5.64% ZnEq (in compliance with NI 43-101). For more information, see Osisko Metals June 25, 2024 news release entitled ‘Osisko Metals releases Pine Point mineral resource estimate: 49.5 million tonnes of indicated resources at 5.52% ZnEq’. The Pine Point project is located on the south shore of Great Slave Lake, NWT, close to infrastructure, with paved road access, an electrical substation and 100 kilometres of viable haul roads.

For further information on this news release, visit www.osiskometals.com or contact:

Don Njegovan, President
Email: info@osiskometals.com
Phone: (416) 500-4129

Cautionary Statement on Forward-Looking Information

This news release contains ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation based on expectations, estimates and projections as at the date of this news release. Any statement that involves predictions, expectations, interpretations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance (often, but not always, using phrases such as ‘expects’, or ‘does not expect’, ‘is expected’, ‘interpreted’, ‘management’s view’, ‘anticipates’ or ‘does not anticipate’, ‘plans’, ‘budget’, ‘scheduled’, ‘forecasts’, ‘estimates’, ‘potential’, ‘feasibility’, ‘believes’ or ‘intends’ or variations of such words and phrases or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘may’ or ‘could’, ‘would’, ‘might’ or ‘will’ be taken, occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information and are intended to identify forward-looking information. This news release contains forward-looking information pertaining to, among other things: the tax treatment of the FT Units; the timing of incurring the Qualifying Expenditures and the renunciation of the Qualifying Expenditures; the ability to advance Gaspé Copper to a construction decision (if at all); the ability to increase the Company’s trading liquidity and enhance its capital markets presence; the potential re-rating of the Company; the ability for the Company to unlock the full potential of its assets and achieve success; the ability for the Company to create value for its shareholders; the advancement of the Pine Point project; the anticipated resource expansion of the Gaspé Copper system and Gaspé Copper hosting the largest undeveloped copper resource in eastern North America.

Forward-looking information is not a guarantee of future performance and is based upon a number of estimates and assumptions of management, in light of management’s experience and perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, as well as other factors that management believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances, including, without limitation, assumptions about: the ability of exploration results, including drilling, to accurately predict mineralization; errors in geological modelling; insufficient data; equity and debt capital markets; future spot prices of copper and zinc; the timing and results of exploration and drilling programs; the accuracy of mineral resource estimates; production costs; political and regulatory stability; the receipt of governmental and third party approvals; licenses and permits being received on favourable terms; sustained labour stability; stability in financial and capital markets; availability of mining equipment and positive relations with local communities and groups. Forward-looking information involves risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events, results, performance, prospects and opportunities to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking information are set out in the Company’s public disclosure record on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca) under Osisko Metals’ issuer profile. Although the Company believes that the assumptions and factors used in preparing the forward-looking information in this news release are reasonable, undue reliance should not be placed on such information, which only applies as of the date of this news release, and no assurance can be given that such events will occur in the disclosed time frames or at all. The Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward- looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by law.

Neither the TSX Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Exchange) accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this news release. No stock exchange, securities commission, or other regulatory authority has approved or disapproved the information contained herein.

Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/1363bf79-5e03-4101-a728-51e24d82c5b7
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/3081ce36-9665-4fc1-95ee-eeef072ff25b

News Provided by GlobeNewswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

  • Brand bias continues to hurt Vanderbilt, and help Notre Dame, in each two-loss team’s quest for College Football Playoff.
  • Vanderbilt has lofty strength of schedule metrics, but recent results hamper Commodores, too.
  • Would 10-2 be enough to qualify Vanderbilt? TBD.

Because, brand bias continues to hurt Vanderbilt in its quest to qualify for the College Football Playoff if it reaches a 10-2 record.

How else to explain why Vanderbilt is ranked No. 14 in the latest CFP rankings, five spots behind No. 9 Notre Dame? The Irish have helmet magic. Vanderbilt has women’s bowling magic.

Notre Dame has a storied brand. Vanderbilt has a doormat’s history.

Vanderbilt suffers in CFP rankings, despite solid metrics

That shouldn’t matter, but it does, because when you put the resumes of these teams side-by-side, Vanderbilt’s outshines Notre Dame’s. The Commodores enjoy the advantage in strength of schedule and strength of record metrics.

Notre Dame’s two losses, one of which occurred at home, came against teams now ranked in the top 15. Vanderbilt’s two losses, both of which occurred on the road, came against teams now ranked in the top 10.

Both of Notre Dame’s losses were close. One of Vanderbilt’s losses was close, albeit after a fourth-quarter rally.

Vanderbilt is the only team with two losses or fewer and a top-25 strength of schedule that’s ranked outside the top 11.

Spare me the eye-test business about Notre Dame’s dominance after opening the season 0-2. The Irish’s schedule eased up significantly after those first two games. Yeah, Notre Dame smashed Arkansas, NC State and Navy. It also struggled to put away meek Boston College.

Remember when Vanderbilt played an ACC team? It shattered Virginia Tech.

CFP selection committee chairman Mack Rhoades commended Vanderbilt’s wins against South Carolina, LSU and Missouri — “really, really good wins” — but he referenced Vanderbilt needing overtime to survive struggling Auburn last weekend. And, he noted Notre Dame’s seven-game win streak.

That’s the other factor at play here, in addition to brand bias: Recency bias.

Recency bias and brand hurt Vanderbilt, boost Notre Dame

Vanderbilt had the bad timing of suffering one of its two losses three days before the initial rankings. Then, it needed a white-knuckle triumph against Auburn before these second rankings.

Vanderbilt’s total body of work is still sturdy. Its recent work is shaky.

Notre Dame had the good fortune to schedule its two tough games during swimming pool season, before fattening up on the Big Ten’s worst team, the SEC’s worst team and the ACC’s worst team. Ah, to be an independent.

Don’t even get me started on Notre Dame being ranked six spots ahead of two-loss Miami, even though Miami beat the Irish.

“The committee, we really like Notre Dame as a complete team,” Rhoades said.

Vanderbilt also ranks behind No. 13 Utah, another two-loss team that has inferior strength of schedule metrics compared to Vanderbilt. The Utes, though, have been at their best the past two games.

Eye test, brand and recency trumps strength of schedule.

I’m also left to wonder what the selection committee’s old-timer retired coaches think of Diego Pavia’s ostentatiousness.

Vanderbilt football a joke no more

I used to mock Vanderbilt mercilessly. The Commodores earned every ounce of that mockery. Five years ago, before Vanderbilt embarked on a winless season, I suggested the SEC boot Vanderbilt. NIL and transfer free agency changed things for everyone. Or, at least, Pavia changed things for Vanderbilt.

In fairness to the committee’s evaluations, Vanderbilt’s defense looks vulnerable. A previously lifeless Auburn offense ignited against the Commodores.

Vanderbilt goes as Pavia goes. He goes hard. So hard, that 10-2 is on the table. Even if the Commodores reach that mark, they don’t control their destiny. Utah, Notre Dame and Oklahoma suffering a third loss would aid Vanderbilt’s quest. Vanderbilt is the SEC’s only two-loss team that might still sweat it on Selection Sunday.

And would you trust the committee to evaluate the Pavia-inspired Vanderbilt and forget the program’s past? Forgetting everything you’ve seen your entire life is tough to do, inside or outside of a committee boardroom.

Just flip on “College GameDay” and listen to Nick Saban discuss Vanderbilt. He’s been a skeptic going on two years. He can’t seem to shake the image of the old Vanderbilt that used to stink up the SEC’s joint in his coaching days.

“It’s just hard for me to recognize the fact they have elevated their program the way they have after so many years in the SEC when they were an easy out,” Saban said on air last month, hours before Vanderbilt beat LSU. “They are not an easy out anymore, but it’s hard for me to digest that.”

The committee’s struggling to digest that, too. If only Vanderbilt could get some of Notre Dame’s shiny gold helmets.

Blake Toppmeyer is the USA TODAY Network’s senior national college football columnist. Email him at BToppmeyer@gannett.com and follow him on X @btoppmeyer.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

There was uncertainty with the first College Football Playoff rankings of the season. The second release Tuesday, Nov. 11, had fewer unknowns with Ohio State expectedly retaining the No. 1 spot.

The defending champion Buckeyes are three games away from completing an unbeaten regular season and clinching a spot in the Big Ten title game. Right behind them is conference rival Indiana. The Hoosiers, who also are unbeaten, kept hold of the second spot after a thrilling defeat of Penn State in the final minute.

Texas A&M, the only other unbeaten in the Bowl Subdivision, remains in third after an impressive road defeat of Missouri. The Aggies are followed by SEC rivals Alabama and Georgia, giving us the same top five as last week.

There was, however, change in the second half of the top 10.

Texas Tech moved up two spots to No. 6, leapfrogging Mississippi after knocking off previously unbeaten Brigham Young to establish itself as the prohibitive Big 12 favorite and knock the Cougars down five spots to No. 12. Oregon improves to No. 8 after its close defeat of Iowa on the road. Notre Dame and Texas gain one spot to complete the top 10.

The race among the Group of Five conference teams has South Florida from the American at No. 24. The Bulls are the lone representative from the group in the top 25. The highest-ranked champion from those conferences is guaranteed a spot in the field.

The ranking is the second of six releases by the committee. The next three will come weekly on Tuesdays until the final release on Sunday, Dec. 7, when the 12 teams in the field and the playoff bracket is unveiled.

CFP rankings Top 25

  1. Ohio State (9-0)
  2. Indiana (10-0)
  3. Texas A&M (9-0)
  4. Alabama (8-1)
  5. Georgia (8-1)
  6. Texas Tech (9-1)
  7. Mississippi (9-1)
  8. Oregon (8-1)
  9. Notre Dame (7-2)
  10. Texas (7-2)
  11. Oklahoma (7-2)
  12. Brigham Young (8-1)
  13. Utah (7-2)
  14. Vanderbilt (8-2)
  15. Miami (7-2)
  16. Georgia Tech (8-1)
  17. Southern California (7-2)
  18. Michigan (7-2)
  19. Virginia (8-2)
  20. Louisville (7-2)
  21. Iowa (6-3)
  22. Pittsburgh (7-2)
  23. Tennessee (6-3)
  24. South Florida (7-2)
  25. Cincinnati (7-2)

How the College Football Playoff would look based on rankings

First round

No. 12 South Florida at No. 5 Georgia

No. 11 Miami at No. 6 Texas Tech

No. 10 Texas at No. 7 Mississippi

No. 9 Notre Dame at No. 8 Oregon

Quarterfinals

No. 4 Alabama vs. Georgia-South Florida winner

No. 3 Texas A&M vs. Texas Tech-Miami winner

No. 2 Indiana vs. Mississippi-Texas winner

No. 1 Ohio State vs. Oregon-Notre Dame winner

What is the College Football Playoff schedule?

The schedule for first-round games taking place on campus sites will see No. 5 hosting No. 12, No. 6 facing No. 11, No. 7 meeting No. 10 and No. 8 squaring off with No. 9.

Winners of those games will advance to the quarterfinals with the Cotton Bowl hosting its matchup on Dec. 31. The other three games of the round will be played Jan. 1 with the Orange Bowl starting the day followed by the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl. The Fiesta Bowl and Peach Bowl will host the semifinals on Jan. 8 and Jan. 9, respectively.

The championship game will be played on Jan. 19 in Miami Gardens, Florida, at Hard Rock Stadium.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Arguably no team has undergone as much tumultuous change in nine months as the Dallas Mavericks.

In February, they made that seismic trade to ship Luka Dončić away to the Los Angeles Lakers. Now, the Mavericks are also in search of a new general manager after they fired Nico Harrison on Tuesday, Nov. 11.

In essence, by firing Harrison, the architect of that Dončić deal, the Mavs are conceding that the trade was a massive mistake. But there are still plenty of long-term ramifications to sort through, and the full effects of the last nine months won’t be clear for years to come.

Here are the winners and losers from the Mavericks’ decision to fire Harrison:

WINNERS

Luka Dončić

Although he may not say so publicly, and although he has more pressing matters to worry about, Dončić is a clear winner in all of this. Even though Dončić has appeared in just 40 games for the Lakers, and even though he hasn’t even won a single playoff series, Harrison’s firing vindicates Dončić, in a way.

Dončić is averaging an absurd 37.1 points per game this season, which leads the NBA. He has slimmed down and has landed with one of the iconic franchises, in one of the premier markets in the country, and the Lakers inked Dončić to a three-year max extension in August.

The Mavericks youth movement

Dallas, and whoever becomes the eventual general manager, has some decisions to make. Anthony Davis is 32 but often injured. Including this season, he has two more seasons left on his $175.3 million contract, with a $62.7player option for 2027-28, according to Spotrac.com. Kyrie Irving, 33, is in a similar position, though for decidedly less money.

Klay Thompson, 35, has two years left at around $17 million per year. Daniel Gafford, 27, Caleb Martin, 30, and any other pricey veterans should all be on alert as potential trade chips. With Harrison gone, the Mavericks may opt to fully reset, freeing up cap space and amassing draft picks.

Rookie Cooper Flagg, the No. 1 overall pick in the 2025 NBA Draft, is the future face of the franchise. The Mavericks should build around him.

Jason Kidd

To a certain extent, this remains to be seen because Kidd faces a very difficult task ahead. He’s the head coach of a Mavericks team that may offload its veterans in a rebuild, so his standing could change quickly. But Harrison’s firing showed Kidd has some goodwill remaining after he led Dallas to the 2024 NBA Finals.

In a way, Harrison becomes the clear fall guy for the controversial Dončić trade, and Kidd absolves himself; his argument becomes that he simply coached the roster that was handed to him. Yet, the Mavericks are 3-8 and facing injuries. Kidd may be a candidate to move into a front office role, potentially even replacing Harrison. The path forward won’t be easy, but Kidd at least is poised to be part of the plan, as opposed to one of its victims.

Michael Finley and Matt Riccardi

Both were assistant general managers under Harrison, and now both are set to be co-interims in Harrison’s place. This allows them to distance themselves from Harrison and the Dončić mess, even though Harrison promoted them and they were undoubtedly part of the process.

It also sets them up to be considered for the job on a permanent basis.

LOSERS

Nico Harrison

It’s hard to see Harrison recovering from this. He remains relatively inexperienced, as far as NBA front office positions go; Harrison had spent 19 seasons with Nike, eventually becoming the vice president of the shoe goliath’s North American operations. Given the shock of the Dončić trade, reason stands that NBA teams will be leery of bringing on Harrison in any high-level capacity. Given the way it was negotiated, that’s even more magnified.

Harrison reportedly did not field multiple calls for Dončić’s services, opting instead to quietly negotiate with his long-time friend Rob Pelinka, the Lakers general manager. By doing that, Harrison operated from a position of little leverage and hurt the Mavericks. Because if it became widely known that Dončić was available, teams would’ve lined up with far more attractive offers.

The reality, though, is that prior to the Dončić trade, Harrison was a mostly decent general manager. He orchestrated the trade that brought Kyrie Irving at a relative bargain. He was aggressive before the February 2024 trade deadline and acquired center Daniel Gafford and perimeter specialist P.J. Washington, both of whom played key roles in pushing the Mavericks to the Finals later that season. Derek Lively was a solid draft choice in 2023.

The Mavericks

This was a team that, just a little more than two years ago, made the 2024 NBA Finals. And though the Celtics breezed through in five games, the Mavericks still had a solid, young core and appeared to be just a piece or two away from winning their second NBA championship and first since 2011.

Now, a complete rebuild is almost certain, and team ownership must be careful and calculated in the way they fill the general manager vacancy. Another misstep could set the Mavericks back to complete irrelevance – all of which brings us to the biggest losers in all of this.

Dallas fans

This is a Mavericks fanbase that is passionate and knows the game well. They’re loyal to their stars and alumni; just look at the warm reception Dirk Nowitzki gets any time he’s near the team.

They had a generational talent in Dončić. They bought his jerseys and cheered him on, and he was only 25 when the trade happened. They were on the cusp of a championship.

Now, with the Cowboys mostly cooked, their best bet for a title appears to be the NHL’s Stars.

But, at the very least, the Dallas Wings have WNBA 2025 Rookie of the Year Paige Bueckers to support.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

  • LSU should be a gold standard job for coaching candidates, but university can’t get out of its own way.
  • Brian Kelly lawsuit against LSU becomes a fresh stain.
  • With LSU in turmoil, Florida and Penn State might start looking pretty good.

LSU is considered a crown jewel job within the college football ecosystem. Coaches who ply their craft elsewhere look at LSU with envy. Ed Orgeron won a national championship there. Les Miles won one and nearly two. Enough said.

The job’s so good, it would take a band of idiots to screw up a coaching search so badly as to make LSU unattractive.

Well, strike up the band!

In the latest twist of buffoons on the bayou, LSU is refusing to confirm it will pay fired coach Brian Kelly the $54 million buyout he’s owed, according to a lawsuit filed by Kelly’s lawyers.

The only way LSU would not owe Kelly his buyout is if it showed he violated his contract terms, allowing LSU to fire him for cause.

LSU has not offered evidence it fired Kelly for any other reason than his job performance. Kelly’s win-loss record is insufficient grounds for a for-cause firing.

Hence, the lawsuit.

“LSU repeatedly confirmed, both publicly and to Coach Kelly, that the termination was due to the team’s performance, not for cause,” the lawsuit states.

Let me put it plainly for LSU: You hired him, you fired him, and now you pay his failure money. That’s how this works.

“LSU is cooked,” attorney Tom Mars wrote on social media, adding “LSU’s stupidity” does not constitute grounds to stiff Kelly on his buyout.

Mars, a well-known lawyer in NCAA circles, is not part of Kelly’s legal team. He gained fame for representing former Mississippi coach Houston Nutt in his lawsuit against Ole Miss.

Mars’ assessment hits the mark. LSU entered into a stupid contract with Kelly. Now, it’s doubling down with more foolishness.

Never mind what you think of Kelly’s job performance. This buyout charade only encumbers the process to replace him. It sends a message coaches can’t trust LSU to honor its contracts. The messier LSU’s situation becomes, the better Florida and Penn State look as destinations.

Brian Kelly lawsuit: LSU trying to stiff coach on buyout

The lawsuit continues that on Nov. 10, “for the very first time,” LSU representatives informed Kelly’s legal team the university believes it has for-cause grounds to fire Kelly.

And, get a load of this, apparently LSU has taken the position that Kelly has “not been formally terminated.”

Excuse me, what?

I could have sworn LSU publicly announced Kelly’s firing Oct. 26. That announcement included language LSU had separated with Kelly, “effective immediately.”

A few days later, Gov. Jeff Landry made a big to-do in a news conference about LSU being on the hook for Kelly’s whopper buyout.

“The spirit of the team needed a change, and so that change was made,” Landry said Oct. 29. “… Right now, we got a $53 million liability.”

That’s straight from the circus ringleader’s mouth.

I hate to be the one to tell LSU, but y’all fired Kelly last month.

We probably shouldn’t be surprised LSU can’t decide whether it has or hasn’t fired Kelly, more than two weeks after it fired Kelly.

Last week, Landry’s puppet Wade Rousse, LSU’s new president, couldn’t decide whether Verge Ausberry was or wasn’t LSU’s athletic director. Ausberry went from interim AD to having the interim tag removed to “acting AD” to, well, who knows what to call him?

LSU’s athletics website calls Ausberry the athletic director. We’ll go with that, at least until the next time Rousse opens his mouth and word-vomits. Ausberry’s the guy running the coaching search, anyway. Because, LSU fired Kelly.

You might recall LSU suspended Ausberry four years ago for his role in improperly handling complaints of sexual and physical abuse against LSU athletes. A reporter for the Louisiana Illuminator wrote last week Rousse told her he didn’t know much about Ausberry’s involvement in that scandal.

That’s how a puppet vets a hire.

LSU football coaching candidates will need some answers

To what degree will coaching candidates care about this ongoing eyesore? That depends on the coach.

Some will overlook the circus as an unfortunate sideshow that can be overcome. LSU’s three coaches before Kelly each won a national championship. This remains a national brand located within fertile recruiting terrain.

Show an egotistical coach the LSU job, and they’ll think, “I can win a national championship there. Les nearly won two …” Hand him his NIL budget, point him to the film room, and let him go to work.

A more skeptical coach who’s currently thriving might demonstrate caution at leaving a good gig in favor of LSU’s imbroglio. Kelly won more than 70% of his games, and he’s having to sue LSU to get his buyout.

Coaches often tout the influence of university alignment to a program’s success. A coach, athletic director and president working in lockstep, free of interference from the governor’s mansion, is the dream.

LSU’s alignment consists of a couple of newbies, a meddling governor and a governor-appointed board of supervisors.

Prospective coaching candidates won’t care about Ausberry’s past suspension, but they might like assurance as to who’s running the show at LSU.

Is it the interim/acting/maybe-permanent athletic director?

Is it the puppet in the president’s suite?

Or, does the coach bypass them all and deal directly with the ringleader in the governor’s mansion?

This saga surrounding Kelly’s buyout puts off odd vibes, too, to potential candidates and especially to their agents. Paying buyouts to fired coaches who didn’t win enough is a cost of doing business. Neither Florida nor Penn State tried to stiff their fired coaches the buyout money owed upon termination.

Landry called for more fiscal responsibility within the next coach’s contract. That’s a charming thought, but this is a coaches’ market. Penny-pinching makes for a difficult sales pitch.

The LSU job should sell itself, but a brigade of buffoons keeps rising to the challenge of screwing this up.

Blake Toppmeyer is the USA TODAY Network’s senior national college football columnist. Email him at BToppmeyer@gannett.com and follow him on X @btoppmeyer.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY