Author

admin

Browsing

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

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

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

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

About 55 North Mining Inc.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

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

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

CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION

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

SOURCE: 55 North Mining Inc.

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

News Provided by ACCESS Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On behalf of the Board of Directors

‘Ralph Shearing’
Ralph Shearing, CEO

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

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

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

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

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

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

SOURCE: Goldgroup Mining, Inc.

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

News Provided by ACCESS Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. Foran Mining (TSX:FOM)

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. Trilogy Metals (TSX:TMQ)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4. Fireweed Metals (TSXV:FWZ)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5. Emerita Resources (TSXV:EMO)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

(TheNewswire)

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

About Prismo Metals Inc.

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

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

Prismo Metals Inc.

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

 

Contact:

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

Gordon Aldcorn, President gordon.aldcorn@prismometals.com

 

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

 

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information

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

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

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

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

 

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

Copyright (c) 2025 TheNewswire – All rights reserved.

News Provided by TheNewsWire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

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

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

World Cup 2026 host stadiums and cities for every game

(All times Eastern)

Arrowhead Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

AT&T Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

BBVA Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

BC Place

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

BMO Field

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Estadio Akron

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Estadio Azteca

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Gillette Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Hard Rock Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Levi’s Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Lincoln Financial Field

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Lumen Field

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Mercedes-Benz Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

MetLife Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

NRG Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

SoFi Stadium

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

World Cup 2026 schedule:

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

Boxer Anthony Joshua was released from a hospital in Nigeria on Wednesday, Dec. 31 two days after surviving a fatal car accident that killed two of his close friends, according to the Associated Press.

Joshua, a former two-time world heavyweight champion whose parents are from Nigeria, had been recovering from minor injuries during the two-vehicle crash near Lagos, according to Matchroom Boxing, which promotes Joshua.

In a video posted on social media after the crash, Joshua looked to be in pain as he exited the vehicle. That vehicle, in which Joshua and his friends were traveling, hit a stationary truck on a major road near Lagos, according to the Associated Press.

Gbenga Omotoso, the Lagos state commissioner for information and strategy, issued a statement on X saying Joshua was discharged late Wednesday afternoon after being “deemed clinically fit to recuperate from home.”

“Anthony and his mother were at the funeral home in Lagos this afternoon to pay their final respects to his two departed friends as they were being prepared for repatriation scheduled for later this evening,” Omotoso also said.

Sina Ghami and Latif “Latz” Ayodele, who worked for Joshua and were close friends with the boxer, were killed in the crash.

Ghami was Joshua’s strength and conditioning coach while Ayodele was a trainer, according to the Associated Press. Hours before the accident, Joshua posted on social media video of his playing table tennis with Ayodele.

Ten days before the accident, Joshua knocked out Jake Paul in the sixth round of their highly anticipated heavyweight fight livestreamed by Netflix.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

If I didn’t know any better, it would be easy to assume the Buffalo Sabres are allergic to the playoffs. Without going into the sordid, grotesque details of what their non-playoff spell has encompassed, there is hope emanating from the Queen City. 

The Sabres have won 10 consecutive games for the first time since assembling a 10-game win streak in November 2018. The streak has pushed them into the second wild-card spot. But will they be able to sustain their playoff-like pace through the new year and into spring? 

Everyone associated with the Sabres has their collective fingers crossed as we explore which other NHL teams have become unfamiliar with playoff action.

Longest active Stanley Cup playoff droughts

5. Utah/Arizona, Columbus, Chicago, Philadelphia (2020)

These four teams haven’t made the postseason since the 2019-20 season. Of the quartet, the Philadelphia Flyers were the only ones to make it to the second round, where they lost a seven-game thriller to the New York Islanders. 

Speaking of the Flyers, they currently have the best shot in the 2025-26 season to end their playoff drought.

4. San Jose Sharks (2019)

While still in the early stage of his career, Celebrini is showcasing all the telltale signs of being a generational talent. That only bodes well for a franchise still in search of its first Stanley Cup title. 

3. Anaheim Ducks (2018)

Like their aforementioned California counterparts, the Anaheim Ducks have more to look forward to than an Ivy League-educated prodigy. They are chock-full of promising young talent, led by 2023 second overall draft pick Leo Carlsson and 19-year-old Beckett Sennecke, the No. 3 pick from the 2024 NHL Draft. 

And just like the Sharks, they haven’t booked a ticket to the dance in a long time, almost eight years to be precise. But if the playoffs were to start today, the Ducks would end that extended dry patch. 

Ducks fans will be looking forward to what should be a quacking 2026. 

2. Detroit Red Wings (2016)

Steve Yzerman took over as executive vice president and GM in 2019, three years after the Red Wings’ last playoff visit. Their nine-year non-playoff streak feels even longer considering the Red Wings haven’t advanced past the first round since 2013. 

However, things are finally starting to look up in Hockeytown. While the adage ‘good things come to those who wait’ probably didn’t refer to a near-decade duration, Detroit appears, at least at the season’s midway mark, poised to re-enter the playoff fray. 

1. Buffalo Sabres (2011)

The Sabres haven’t competed in a playoff game since ‘Game of Thrones’ first hit the airwaves. The franchise’s 14 years, going on 15, of missing the playoffs is the second-longest across North American professional sports. 

The New York Jets, who last made the playoffs in 2010, are the only franchise enduring a longer playoff drought. Although in seasons, they were tied at 14 each going into 2025-26.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

  • Week 18 of the NFL season brings speculation about which coaches might be fired on ‘Black Monday.’
  • We rank eight coaches on the ‘hot seat,’ with Pete Carroll of the Raiders the most likely to be let go.
  • Despite high expectations, several teams are facing uncertain futures.

At a time when a sizable number of NFL coaches are trying to plot a path past the regular season, many more are simply looking to hang on for another year.

The arrival of Week 18 also brings about plenty of speculation about Black Monday, the annual date on which teams that fall short of the postseason begin enacting staff changes. Upheaval is almost a certainty, with the New York Giants and Tennessee Titans having already dismissed their leaders.

But this year’s setup seems to entail a good bit more mystery than that of previous years. With few buzzy names in the assistant coaching ranks – at least among offensive play-callers – might teams exhibit a bit more patience in forging ahead with known entities? Mike Tomlin’s name has drawn the most attention among coaches facing an uncertain future, but reports have indicated an outright firing by the Pittsburgh Steelers isn’t expected as a potential resolution even if the two sides were to split. Meanwhile, while the New York Jets’ Aaron Glenn and Cincinnati Bengals’ Zac Taylor each fell well short of expectations in 2025, neither appears to be at imminent risk of being dismissed – though the coaching cycle routinely produces a surprise or two.

Ahead of Week 18, here’s our final NFL hot seat rankings, leading off with the figure most likely to be let go:

1. Pete Carroll, Las Vegas Raiders

If Carroll had one task to check off in his first season back in the NFL after his one-year absence, it was to establish a baseline level of competence for the Raiders. Maybe that seemed as though it would be aiming low for a coach selected for the NFL’s 2010s All-Decade Team, but that floor wasn’t something Las Vegas could count on in the previous three years. Still, Carroll’s charges have hardly embodied his ‘always compete’ mantra. In taking the pole position for the No. 1 draft pick, the Raiders have made a full-scale reset look inevitable, with almost no silver lining to be seen for the Silver and Black. Carroll was clearly counting on a rapid turnaround, and there’s little point in having the oldest coach in NFL history oversee a much more extensive build than anyone in the organization had prepared for. And with Heisman Trophy winner Fernando Mendoza serving as the potential prize for a year of pain, the franchise would serve itself well by instituting the kind of alignment that has long eluded it.

2. Raheem Morris, Atlanta Falcons

A three-game win streak could help build the case that Morris knows how to guide this group. But the late-season surge also underscores how badly Atlanta has underachieved on the whole. Things aren’t as simple as merely running it back for the Falcons, with quarterback Michael Penix Jr.’s trajectory even more uncertain following his third torn anterior cruciate ligament since the start of his college career. Atlanta has also been dogged by repeated special teams errors, a distinctly bad look for a franchise with minimal margin for error. Arthur Blank has rare patience in the NFL ownership class, but an eighth consecutive losing season – and a postseason drought only exceeded by that of the Jets – could test even the most even-tempered decision-maker.

3. Jonathan Gannon, Arizona Cardinals

It would be easy to cast misfortune as the running theme of this season for Arizona, which is 2-8 in one-score games and became the first team in NFL history to lose three consecutive contests on the final play. And with 22 players on injured reserve, the Cardinals certainly haven’t been able to show what they can do at full strength, particularly offensively. But five of the defeats in the ongoing eight-game losing streak have come by at least 20 points, undermining any sense that this group is on the verge of a breakthrough. Some form of major change feels necessary in the desert, especially given the gulf between expectations and reality for Year 3 of Gannon and general manager Monti Ossenfort’s reign. But Arizona could stop short of making a shift at the top and instead alter its outlook elsewhere on the coaching staff and at quarterback, where Kyler Murray’s tenure looks to have run its course.

4. Kevin Stefanski, Cleveland Browns

In a vacuum, a coach with a 7-26 record the last two seasons typically would find himself atop this list rather than placed in the middle. But context matters when evaluating Stefanski, who was hardly set up to succeed this year. That dynamic was particularly evident behind center, with the coach cycling a trio of starting options that constituted the league’s worst collection of passing talent. Still smarting from the ill-fated Deshaun Watson trade, Cleveland set itself up for a 2026 resurgence by dealing back to earn another first-round draft pick this upcoming spring. Stefanski aided that effort by bringing along one of the league’s most impressive rookie classes, giving a roster starved for young talent something resembling an actual foundation. Still, even though he ceded play-calling duties to offensive coordinator Tommy Rees, the two-time Coach of the Year is ultimately still responsible for an attack that ranks 31st in scoring. A reprieve would be entirely reasonable given the task facing Stefanski this season, but it can’t be guaranteed.

5. John Harbaugh, Baltimore Ravens

An unceremonious end to the season isn’t all that will await the loser of Sunday’s regular-season capper for the AFC North title, as either Tomlin or Harbaugh will surely face a barrage of questions about the future after falling short of the playoffs. Ending the second-longest tenure of any active coach is no trivial matter, as Harbaugh has a Lombardi Trophy to his résumé and is just one year removed from coming up short in the AFC championship game. Still, the Ravens were often responsible for their own undoing throughout this season, and Harbaugh did himself no favors with Derrick Henry’s late usage – or lack thereof – in a Week 16 loss to the New England Patriots. Baltimore is at risk of squandering the Kansas City Chiefs’ downfall this season, and the organization needs to pounce on a potential reset for the longtime AFC heavyweight. And two-time NFL MVP Lamar Jackson might benefit from a fresh direction as he prepares to turn 29 and enter a distinct new chapter of his career. Still, extending the season by a week or two likely extinguishes the matter.

6. Todd Bowles, Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Having lost seven of their last eight games and now needing help to secure a fifth consecutive NFC South title, the Buccaneers are in full tailspin mode. How much of that falls on Bowles depends on your perspective. Incessant injuries have prevented the offense from ever reaching full strength, and Baker Mayfield’s struggles have been so pervasive that the coach himself declared Tampa Bay has ‘got to be better at the quarterback position.’ But Bowles’ defense has also weighed the team down, ranking 26th in yards allowed per play while sporting a troubling overall trend line since the Week 9 bye. Perhaps the organization opts not to pursue drastic action amid the meltdown and Bowles receives a fifth season at the helm. Regardless, the Buccaneers will have to come to terms with the significant step back the franchise has taken in a year in which it had designs on making up ground on the NFC’s elite.

7. Matt LaFleur, Green Bay Packers

With the Packers locked into the No. 7 seed in the NFC playoff field, LaFleur certainly won’t have to fear his Black Monday fate. Of the coaches to make the postseason, however, he might be on he shakiest ground. The Packers’ positioning is unquestionably a disappointment for a franchise that backed an all-in approach with its early-season performance, and LaFleur has had to answer for several costly flops in critical spots. The coach’s standing had already become a point of interest over the summer when new Packers president and CEO Ed Policy did not offer him or general manager Brian Gutekunst an extension. Still, LaFleur has Green Bay in the playoffs for the sixth time in seven years, and season-ending injuries to Micah Parsons, Tucker Kraft and Devonte Wyatt played significant roles in the team’s late woes. Flaming out in the wild-card round might mean Green Bay at least has something to think about.

8. Mike McDaniel, Miami Dolphins

In following the biggest opening-week embarrassment with Tua Tagovailoa airing out his frustrations with teammates and subsequently apologizing for the finger-pointing, Miami managed to frontload many of its most persistent problems this season. That’s overall a credit to McDaniel, who at least steadied a ship that looked liable to capsize around midseason. Since parting ways with general manager Chris Grier and trading away one of its best players in Jaelan Phillips, the Dolphins have gone 5-2. McDaniel arrived at this point by already laying the groundwork for a post-Tagovailoa transition year in 2026 with a robust run game. Owner Stephen Ross could opt for a fresh start, but McDaniel has made the most of his opportunity to see out the season.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

  • The current College Football Playoff format creates excessive travel demands for teams and their fans.
  • Coaches suggest moving the playoff schedule to December and holding more games on campus sites.
  • Playing playoff games at neutral sites has led to low ticket sales and a lack of atmosphere.

MIAMI GARDENS, FL – This is common sense stuff, everyone. If we can see it, they can, too.

Those who have built the College Football Playoff can surely understand they’ve asked Oregon fans to travel cross-country to Miami for the Orange Bowl quarterfinal, fly back to Oregon, and a week later fly cross-country again for the CFP semifinal in Atlanta if the Ducks advance. 

Then fly back to Oregon, and 10 days later, fly back to Miami for the national championship game in Atlanta. Or approximately 15,000 miles over three weeks.

Or that No. 1 Indiana’s road is Los Angeles/Atlanta/Miami. Or No. 2 Ohio State’s road is Dallas/Phoenix/Miami.

What in blue blazes is going on here?

“It’s the craziest thing,” Oregon coach Dan Lanning said. “There’s a better way to do all of this. We’re not inventing the wheel here.”

It’s not that difficult, everyone. Strengthen the standalone December playoff product, and avoid the NFL playoffs a month later.

This brings us all the way back to common sense, and that we’ve been obsessing over the wrong problem all along. It’s not just who earns the right to play in the CFP, it’s the sequencing of it all.

Here’s how Lanning, and Texas Tech coach Joey McGuire — whose teams play Thursday in the Orange Bowl CFP semifinal — think it should all play out. 

(A quick addendum: Lanning and McGuire are just meathead football coaches, like many other coaches who see this the same way. What do they know about running a billion-dollar postseason tournament? Leave that to the brilliant university presidents and conference commissioners — who haven’t screwed up a single thing over the past four years of paradigm change.)

The playoff, coaches say, should begin the first weekend of December where Championship Week currently resides. That doesn’t mean eliminating conference championship games (and millions in revenue), it means beginning the season one week early. 

A novel concept, I know. 

The quarterfinals are then played a week later, or the second Friday and Saturday of December. The semifinals are played a week after that on the third Friday and Saturday of December, and the championship game on New Year’s Day — the holiest of college football days. 

Here’s the key: the first three rounds of the tournament are played on campus, thereby maximizing the impact of the regular season — no matter how many teams (12 or 16) you throw into the playoff bracket.

The more you win in the regular season, the greater your opportunity to host playoff games and gain a significant competitive advantage. 

And bonus: the convoluted and dysfunctional college football calendar — and the unwieldly player procurement process of national signing day and the opening and closing of the transfer portal — ends. Everything begins after Jan. 1.  

“The idea should be to make everything easier for all involved,” McGuire said. “We’re the furthest thing from that right now.”

This isn’t the men’s basketball tournament, a made-for-television neutral site event that emphasizes the underdog. Because the underdog chucking 3-pointers possession after possession can do the unthinkable. 

The underdog chucking deep balls play after play in the CFP loses by 30.

It’s a completely different sport and tournament, and absurd to even compare the two. Almost as absurd as Oregon playing Texas Tech in an NFL stadium in the second round of the CFP —  instead of Texas Tech rewarded for the greatest season in school history by hosting in the game day asylum that is Lubbock.

“I can’t even imagine what it would be like to have a home playoff game,” said Texas Tech quarterback Behren Morton. “Our fans are wild in the regular season. What would a playoff game look like?”      

Like it did in the first round at Norman, Eugene, College Station and Oxford. Wild, never before seen environments. 

Or you can have the current quarterfinal landscape, where ticket brokers have scooped up thousands of tickets — and now can’t sell them. The get-in price for the Orange Bowl is $49, and $32 for a Cotton Bowl featuring two of the biggest television properties (Ohio State, Miami) in the sport. 

Something, everyone, isn’t working. 

It’s bad enough that CFP leaders force the highest-ranked Group of 5 champion on its marquee event, despite the drastic difference in schedule difficulty. They then compounded the problem this year, when the selection committee added a Group of 5 at-large selection.

It’s worse that quarterfinal games — when the tournament truly begins — are struggling to fill stadiums and lacking juice because they’re not on campus. The college football regular season, the greatest television event in sports this side of the NFL, is an ever-growing monster because of rare campus environments. 

It makes no sense to take the most important show of the season — the tournament to decide the champion of the sport — and let it play out at neutral sites. It’s not the 1980s and 90s anymore, the golden ring is no longer a major bowl game.

Its now a home playoff game, and all the pomp and parade that goes with it — including Fiddy showing up in Norman, of all places, singing ‘Many Men’ at the end of the third quarter.

I’m tryin’ to be what I’m destined to be… I’m a diamond in the dirt that ain’t been found.

The CFP can no longer avoid tournament change, no longer run from its destiny. Everything else in the sport has drastically changed, why cling to the old postseason? 

The bowl season won’t go anywhere, and will be as strong as ever — merely 41(!!) games strong. The Rose Bowl is still the grandaddy of them all, the annual home of the national championship game. 

Once the sequencing is figured out, once the idea of emphasizing what makes college football unique and bulletproof is embraced, the thought of adding meaningless Group of 5 charity games to the process becomes utter blasphemy.

Then the real fun begins. Campus games take over, and funnel into the New Year’s Day spectacle of the Rose Bowl. 

The college football holy ground. 

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

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

Stallion Uranium Corp. (the ‘Company’ or ‘Stallion’) (TSX-V: STUD; OTCQB: STLNF; FSE: B76) is pleased to announce that, further to its news releases dated December 12, 2025 and December 17, 2025, it has increased its non-brokered private placement to raise gross proceeds of $7,723,064 (the ‘Offering’). The Company also announces that it has closed the Offering, issuing 17,162,365 flow-through shares of the Company as a ‘flow-through share’ within the meaning of the Income Tax Act (Canada) (each, a ‘FT Share’) at a price of $0.45 per FT Share.

The gross proceeds from the FT Shares will be used by the Company to incur eligible ‘Canadian exploration expenses’ that qualify as ‘flow-through critical mineral mining expenditures’ as such terms are defined in the Income Tax Act (Canada) (the ‘Qualifying Expenditures‘) related to the Company’s uranium projects in the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan, on or before December 31, 2026. All Qualifying Expenditures will be renounced in favour of the subscribers of the FT Shares effective December 31, 2025.

The FT Shares issued pursuant to the Offering are subject to a four-month and one day hold period from the date of issuance under applicable Canadian securities laws.

In connection with the closing of the Offering, the Company paid the following cash fees to eligible arm’s length finders: $24,728 to Canaccord Genuity Corp., $353,524.84 to Accilent Capital Management Inc., $3,465 to Research Capital Corporation, $70,000 to PB Markets Inc., $47,250 to GloRes Securities Inc.; $28,000 to Wealth (WCPD Inc.), and $3,150 to Sightline Wealth Management.

This press release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any of the securities in the United States. The securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the ‘U.S. Securities Act‘), or any state securities laws and may not be offered or sold within the United States or to or for the account or benefit of a U.S. person (as defined in Regulation S under the U.S. Securities Act) unless registered under the U.S. Securities Act and applicable state securities laws or an exemption from such registration is available.

About Stallion Uranium Corp.:

Stallion Uranium is working to ‘Fuel the Future with Uranium’ through the exploration of roughly 1,700 sq/km in the Athabasca Basin, home to the largest high-grade uranium deposits in the world. The company, with JV partner Atha Energy holds the largest contiguous project in the Western Athabasca Basin adjacent to multiple high-grade discovery zones. With a commitment to responsible exploration and cutting-edge technology such as the use of the proprietary Haystack TI technology, Stallion is positioned to play a key role in the future of clean energy.

Our leadership and advisory teams are comprised of uranium and precious metals exploration experts with the capital markets experience and the technical talent for acquiring and exploring early-stage properties. For more information visit stallionuranium.com.

On Behalf of the Board of Stallion Uranium Corp.:

Matthew Schwab
CEO and Director

Corporate Office:
700 – 838 West Hastings Street,
Vancouver, British Columbia,
V6C 0A6

T: 604-551-2360
info@stallionuranium.com

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

This news release contains forward-looking statements and forward-looking information within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation (collectively, ‘forward-looking statements’) that relate to the Company’s current expectations and views of future events. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance (often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as ‘will likely result’, ‘are expected to’, ‘expects’, ‘will continue’, ‘is anticipated’, ‘anticipates’, ‘believes’, ‘estimated’, ‘intends’, ‘plans’, ‘forecast’, ‘projection’, ‘strategy’, ‘objective’ and ‘outlook’) are not historical facts and may be forward-looking statements and may involve estimates, assumptions and uncertainties which could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those expressed in such forward-looking statements. No assurance can be given that these expectations will prove to be correct and such forward-looking statements included in this material change report should not be unduly relied upon. These statements speak only as of the date they are made.

Forward-looking statements are based on a number of assumptions and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Company’s control, which could cause actual results and events to differ materially from those that are disclosed in or implied by such forward-looking statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for the Company to predict all of them or assess the impact of each such factor or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement. Any forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement.

News Provided by GlobeNewswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com