SEATTLE – “It feels exactly the same,” Tyler Adams quipped.

The build-up to the U.S. men’s national team’s World Cup round of 16 was certainly different this time around. Between playing on home soil in front of electric, sold-out crowds and a string of entertaining wins behind them, head coach Mauricio Pochettino‘s side seemed in as great a position to reach their first quarterfinal in 24 years when they met Belgium at Lumen Field on Monday.

In an instant, though, it was over – Belgium’s Charles De Ketelaere scored nine minutes in, the forward taking advantage of a team that had not hit its stride and never would. A 4-1 loss was a fair result for a group that did not actually rise to the occasion, barely taking a stab at getting into the game and booking their fourth straight round of 16 exit at the World Cup.

“Belgium, they had a good game plan and they played balls in behind us when we pressed and it caused a lot of problems, won a lot of second balls and they were good in the boxes,” Christian Pulisic said. “That’s where the game comes down to and they were clinical and it was not quite enough from us.”

Pulisic, who came off in the 59th minute after tweaking his ankle and knee in the same play, offered the natural conceit that Belgium were simply better, both on paper and on the day. It was always destined to be the case at some point during this World Cup, no matter how ambitious or hopeful people were about this version of the USMNT. He is not wrong that small things went against them, the team always trying to punch above their weight. 

The moments that actually slipped away from them, though, were a step below the actual level expected of them. Hans Vanaken‘s goal to put Belgium 3-1 up in the 57th minute was the instance where it all slipped away, Matt Freese with a blunder of epic proportions to seal the deal.

“Disappointed for my involvement and error in judgment on the third goal,” Freese, whose rise from zero caps at the start of June 2025 to Monday’s game likely means his international career will be defined by that great mistake, said. “It’s part of the position. I know the guys in front of me did everything they could today to get the win and I’m so proud of them and I wish that that moment was different and wish the result was different … I felt him so close, I thought he was going to kick my leg and so I tried to get out of it.”

Freese is merely one of several players whose opportunities came and went, just as the team’s did. Pulisic is perhaps most representative of it – an injury kept him out of the second half of their win over Paraguay, the entirety of their win over Australia and much of their loss to Turkiye in the group stage. Another one meant he exited Monday’s game early, too, though against Belgium, he was also invisible on the pitch until he went down writhing in pain in the opening minutes of the second half. The dejection was obvious as he did his post-match rounds – a decade after becoming the face of his generation with a World Cup on home soil on the horizon, he did not manage to register all that much.

“I felt really good this summer playing with the guys and I thought my level was high,” he reflected. “It’s disappointing. I didn’t quite have the moments I was hoping to and to try to help us to really push and get over this next step of beating a really good team so I’m disappointed with myself, of course, but I’m going to try to stay positive. I did a lot of good things and the team did as well.”

The player whose name recognition grew the most was Folarin Balogun, who was caught in the quagmire of a suspension he graciously accepted and then was rescinded in the most controversial of ways. His spot in the lineup was unsurprising if an unwanted signal of organizational incompetence but he, too, was ineffective on Monday.

“When you know you’re given a red card and then usually the protocol is you usually don’t play the following game and then when that decision’s overturned, of course it’s going to controversial so for me, it’s something that didn’t really surprise me too much but as a player, my job is just to go out there and be focused on my job, “he said.

The team rejected the notion that Balogun’s case offered a distraction or that the moment was too big, even if it felt like the lights were too bright for them. They had no answer for Belgium but it was not simply a tactical matter – their trademark habits of the World Cup had gone out the door and it remains hard to know why.

“It’s difficult to say but I can only be honest,” Balogun said. “I don’t think we had a good game today, collectively. We played well in the other games. We were very intense, we were able to generate energy with the crowd and today we didn’t give the crowd a lot to cheer for. That’s the most disappointing thing and that’s the part that hurts the most for me personally. We have to wait four years again to be in this position, which is hurtful again.”

Even the team’s most honest players like Adams had no answers, spitting out platitudes about how elite sports work rather than knowing what to say as a great opportunity to make history and capture a nation’s always-evasive attention span was squandered.

“That’s a great question,” Adams said. “Wish I had the answer right now. I don’t know. I don’t know. I think that just overall, it was the small things. Second ball’s not falling to you when you feel like before, they were in the right spot and then winning them. Just little gaps that were being exploited. Just small connections in the game where in other games just felt like everything was a little bit cooler and sharper … I don’t think it was the opponent, the speed of the game, the moment, I don’t think any of that. I think it’s just small details of the game that got away from us. They get away from you like that and then obviously you’re going to lose the game.”

The peak years of the USMNT’s golden generation – or at least until another golden generation shows up – got away from them, even if not all of it was a surprise. A loss to Belgium, formidable even in their inconsistency, is not inherently the problem but the manner in which they did should weigh heavily on those who are tasked with ensuring the program improves. It is not a surprise that Freese is not of the same caliber as Belgium’s UEFA Champions League winner in goal, Thibaut Courtois. 

There is no shock value when Belgium can brag about bringing Jeremy Doku off the bench when the USMNT’s best option is a rusty Gio Reyna, who, at 23 years old, still has no consistent documented history of living up to his great potential. The surprise is that, after weeks of being one of the teams to watch at the World Cup, they exited the tournament with barely a whimper.

“That just didn’t feel like it was us out there today,” defender Antonee Robinson said. “We didn’t win any individual duels. We looked like we lacked energy. We looked like we weren’t as fluid as we have been.”

Questions about the team’s mental toughness will loom large as the long road to the 2030 World Cup officially begins, just as much as queries about the strength of the talent will. Some will take positives from the fact that they won their first knockout game in 24 years with the win over Bosnia and Herzegovina but the expanded format is more responsible for that than anything else, the round of 32 feeling like a holding place before the knockouts truly begin depending on the matchup. How exactly they dig themselves out of a multigenerational hole, though, remains the big question facing the team.

“We won the game against Bosnia,” Pulisic said. “We can for sure be proud of [that] but I just think we want to have higher hopes in that. We want to be able to go and compete in some of the best in the world and we just still have that next step to climb.”

Lionel Messi will look to continue his scoring dominance when he leads defending champion Argentina against Egypt in the 2026 World Cup Round of 16 on Tuesday. Messi already has seven goals in four World Cup matches, and he’s the second favorite at FanDuel Sportsbook at +165 to win the Golden Boot. The Argentinians are looking to win their fourth-ever World Cup and reached the quarterfinals for the 11th time. Egypt, meanwhile, have reached the Round of 16 for the first time since 1934 and are playing in just their fourth World Cup competition.

Kickoff for Argentina vs. Egypt is at noon ET in Atlanta. The latest Argentina vs. Egypt odds from FanDuel list Argentina at -310 (bet $310 to win $100) on the 90-minute money line, with Egypt at +1000 and a draw at +380. The over/under for total goals is 2.5. Argentina are -800 to advance, with Egypt at +520. Before locking in any Argentina vs. Egypt picks or World Cup 2026 predictions, check out the Argentina vs. Egypt predictions from SportsLine’s Martin Green.

After working in the sports betting industry for several years, Green became a professional sports writer and handicapper and has covered the game worldwide. Last year, Green was profitable in multiple areas on his soccer betting picks, including the Champions League (+211.25) and Bundesliga (+100). He’s also been red-hot in 2026, posting an 18-8 record over his last 26 UCL picks, returning nearly $1,000 in profit. He’s also on a an 18-7 roll (+908) on his World Cup picks. Anyone wanting to follow his World Cup betting advice at sportsbooks and on betting apps could see big returns.

Now, Green has studied Argentina vs. Egypt and just revealed his 2026 World Cup picks and betting predictions. You can head to SportsLine now to see his picks. Here are several World Cup odds and soccer betting lines for Argentina vs. Egypt:

Top Argentina vs. Egypt predictions

After examining Argentina vs. Egypt from every angle, Green is leaning Over 2.5 total goals (-106). Argentina have been explosive so far in the competition, outscoring their opponents 11-3. They are also on an 11-match winning streak, scoring no fewer than two goals in 10 of those matches during that stretch.

Egypt have allowed one goal in each of their four World Cup matches, but face a different challenge this time around. “Captain Lionel Messi has scored seven goals in four games at this tournament, and it will be difficult for the Egyptian defense to contain him,” Green said. See Green’s best bets for Argentina vs. Egypt at SportsLine, and you can bet the Over in Argentina vs. Egypt at FanDuel here:

How to make Argentina vs. Egypt picks

After studying Argentina vs. Egypt from every angle, Green has found a critical x-factor and locked in a pair of best bets, including one plus-money play. You can head to SportsLine to see what they are. 

So what are the best bets for Egypt vs. Argentina? Visit SportsLine now to see the best bets for Argentina vs. Egypt, all from expert on an 18-7 roll on WC picks, and find out.

Barcelona frustrated Manchester United by not triggering Marcus Rashford’s £26million option-to-buy clause

Manchester United could see Barcelona repeat their Marcus Rashford loan trick to sign Rafael Leao.

Leao is expected to leave AC Milan this summer, with United among a long list of clubs linked with his signature. The Portuguese winger revealed in May that he wishes to depart Milan after seven years at the San Siro, having notched 80 goals and 65 assists in 291 matches.

The Italian side have since appointed ex-United head coach Ruben Amorim, whose famous reliance on wing-backs means Leao doesn’t fit into his plans. As such, the 27-year-old is likely to find a new club, with his lowered price tag of £51million attracting suitors.

Get MEN Premium now for just £1 HERE – or get involved in our United WhatsApp group by clicking HERE. You can also join our United Facebook page by clicking HERE and don’t miss out on our brilliant selection of newsletters HERE.

La Gazzetta dello Sport claim Barcelona are a potential destination for the Reds target. The Catalans have reportedly enquired about his situation, following club president Joan Laporta’s long-running interest in the player in recent years.

Leao has also been offered to Barca by his agent several times in the past. But while he would undoubtedly bolster Hansi Flick’s attacking options, the left wing position is not a priority for the La Liga champions.

That is due to Barca being well covered, already having Raphinha and recently signing Anthony Gordon for a whopping £70m. The Gordon deal was struck after the Blaugrana decided not to exercise Rashford’s option-to-buy clause to sign the United forward for a mere £26m, following his successful season-long loan.

They are similarly unlikely to want to sign Leao permanently, given his fee and striker Julian Alvarez being their top priority. However, they could be open to market opportunities that present themselves, like Rashford’s initial loan move.

Leao, whose contract expires in two years’ time, might be available on a loan deal if no one else is willing to meet Milan’s valuation. As such, a potential move to the Camp Nou may not be off the table.

The only sticking point if Barca opt to utilise the same method they used to bring in Rashford is that Milan may prefer to only accept a loan as a stepping stone, preferring an obligation to buy clause in order to avoid the situation United faced this summer with Rashford.

Leao’s future is expected to be resolved in the coming weeks, with the winger set to shift his focus back to club football after Portugal were knocked out of the World Cup by Spain.

Several other Premier League clubs and Saudi Pro League sides are also reportedly interested in the winger.

Thousands of Man United fans upgraded their matchday last season. This is how they did it.

Advertisement

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

Various Prices

Seat Unique

Buy official packages at Seat Unique

Official premium experiences at Old Trafford are available now for the 26/27 Premier League season. Make it easier than ever to turn a regular fixture into something genuinely unforgettable.

“I’m the one that got them to do it,” said Donald Trump on Monday, referring to FIFA’s hugely controversial decision to suspend the red card ban of USA striker Folarin Balogun ahead of their loss to Belgium in the last 16 of the World Cup.

The US president then claimed he had just called for a review of the incident, which FIFA and their president, Gianni Infantino, insisted was then ruled upon by their disciplinary committee. The committee has not ruled on any other decision in a World Cup. Both the reviewing of red cards at the World Cup and political interference of any kind is banned by FIFA’s own statutes.

Sky-high ticket prices, the refusals of visas to fans, officials, player’s families and even a referee have all contributed to a tournament in which FIFA, and Trump, have been ever-present. These issues have all contributed to a spike in unpopularity for an organization that was already disliked by fans, if not necessarily by federations.

Infantino, Trump relationship has eroded FIFA trust

Several factors have contributed to growing frustration with FIFA.

The decision to award US President Trump FIFA’s inaugural Peace Prize last December, shortly before Trump started a war with tournament participant Iran, was reportedly a unilateral move by FIFA President Infantino and has further eroded trust both within and outside the organization.

FIFA employ a rotation policy for World Cup hosting — that means each confederation should host a tournament in turn, with the exception of Oceania, which lacks the facilities since Australia began playing in Asian competition. But with matches in the 2030 World Cup scheduled in Europe, Africa and South America, that cleared the way for Saudi Arabia to be awarded the 2034 tournament unchallenged and much earlier than Asia would otherwise have been due, in 2042.

With Infantino set to exceed the usual presidential term limit of 12 years, again likely unopposed, frustration with FIFA is at an all-time high, according to many observers. But can anything be done?

How does FIFA maintain its power?

FIFA is responsible for the game’s global development but also acts as its commercial operator, a system many governance experts have questioned.

The World Cup is its key financial driver, though the recently revamped and expanded Club World Cup is now another key contributor. That competition has led to widespread complaints from players and player unions about a congested calendar that makes unreasonable demands.

“I don’t think the players are listened to that much, if I’m totally honest,” said Bayern Munich and England striker Harry Kane last year.

Structurally, each of the 211 member nations (which sit in six continental federations), gets a single vote for the president every four years. These member associations are then financially rewarded, to a greater or lesser degree, through various schemes and programs.

“The commercial dimension is the bedrock of FIFA’s system of power. The money is used by the presidents to accumulate and consolidate their power,” Miguel Maduro, a former chairman of FIFA’s Governance, Audit and Compliance Committee, told DW. He was dismissed from the post in 2017 after attempting to enforce political neutrality rules regarding Russia.

“It’s what supports the system of patronage through which presidents reward those loyal to them and punish anyone that dares criticize anything. It explains why incumbent presidents are never challenged and stay in power indefinitely.”

Can politics and the EU force FIFA to change?

Like Maduro, Nick McGeehan, of human rights NGO FairSquare, agrees that any reform would have to be imposed upon FIFA. And with individual member nations not incentivized or able to drive change, he is calling on the European Union to take up the fight.

“It requires political intervention. There is no other way to fix FIFA,” he told DW.

“I think the most obvious example would be the European Union, who could regulate and govern sport the way they regulate other things like Big Tech.”

FairSquare have filed a complaint with the Investigatory Chamber to the FIFA Ethics Committee over Infantino’s dealings with Trump while, separately, fan group Football Supporters Europe (FSE) and advocacy group Euroconsumers filed a complaint about ticket prices to the European Commission shortly before the World Cup.

A Commission spokesperson would not be drawn on whether the EU might take on FIFA, telling DW only that the FSE and Euroconsumers complaint was being dealt with “in line with our standard procedures.”

Asked whether they might intervene in the various questionable World Cup ticket practices, the spokesperson went on to confirm that EU laws “do not regulate the price levels for goods and services, such as event tickets.” But added that: “Traders must adequately inform consumers about the total price of their offers and avoid misleading commercial practices, such as making attractive starting price claims for tickets that are not available or pressure-selling techniques while consumers wait in the virtual queue.”

Though definitive political action is so far thin on the ground, McGeehan retains hope.

“There is going to be a politician somewhere who recognizes the political value of taking people on and actually trying to hold them accountable. And I find that quite an exciting prospect, because I think it’s inevitable right now.”

Might UEFA and FIFA tensions force a breakaway?

While it operates under FIFA’s umbrella, there are simmering tensions between FIFA and the powerful European federation, UEFA. These came to a head in the Balogun incident, with UEFA releasing a statement that said FIFA had “crossed a red line” and expressed “disbelief at such an unprecedented, incomprehensible and unjustifiable decision.”

Earlier in the tournament, they became apparent in UEFA’s hiring of Somalian referee Omar Artan for the Super Cup final, days after he’d been refused entry to the US to officiate at the World Cup.

“Football is made to connect people,” said UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin.

Last year, UEFA delegates walked out of the FIFA Congress, accusing Infantino of prioritizing “private political interests” after turning up late from a diplomatic tour of the Middle East alongside Trump.

“There are tensions between UEFA and FIFA, and UEFA are a huge confederation and have the ear of some of the biggest and the most historic footballing nations. So if there was any form of breakaway within football it would have to come from UEFA or a number of UEFA nations getting together,” Geoff Walters, a professor in sports business at the University of Liverpool in the UK, told DW.

“But it’s hard in the context of football-politics to put your head above that parapet because you get shot down. If you do say something, then what does it mean? Is it going to harm your chances of hosting competitions, which can be beneficial? Does it mean that you are ostracized from the international community?”

Germany serve as an example of this. After national team members covered their mouths in a political gesture prior to their first match in Qatar in 2022, the team and federation have rowed back on their support of political causes, possibly with a hosting bid for World Cup 2034 or 2038 in mind.

However, in line with other federation heads, German FA (DFB) President Bernd Neuendorf did speak out on the Balogun incident.

“The impression that there has been active political interference in sports must be dispelled swiftly and conclusively. The integrity of the competition and the credibility of FIFA are at stake,” he said.

UEFA themselves had to deal with the threat of an elite-club-driven breakaway Super League in 2021 and the legal issues that followed. Maduro said the organization “suffers from that same governance flaws as FIFA, albeit in a less obvious and radical manner.”

What’s in a FIFA breakaway for the rest of the world?

UEFA’s standing with the rest of the world’s federations may also have been weakened by Ceferin’s reported recent comments that the expanded World Cup makes a lot of matches “completely uninteresting.” A coalition of 13 football associations from Africa and Asia said they “firmly reject” the comments reported by Zurnal24, an online newspaper in Ceferin’s native Slovenia.

The prestige and power of Europe and South America, particularly Brazil and Argentina, are also not as strong as they may seem compared to Infantino’s power base in Asia and Africa. Walters said this is another reason why a breakaway appears a distant possibility.

“If it was spearheaded by leading nations, what would happen to the smaller nations across the world? What would happen to their ability to develop football in their countries?

“That’s part of the challenge with global sport that we’re seeing, not just in the context of the World Cup, but in the context of a lot of sporting leagues, where you are seeing the bigger teams starting to look to push and break away. They want to maintain the largest slice of the pie, of the commercial income and revenues that are coming into that sport,” he said.

Is FIFA reaching areas others can’t?

While many others have questioned those commercial motivations, Infantino has insisted they are for the greater good.

“Every dollar we generate goes back into football,” he told reporters on the eve of the tournament on June 10.

“If we were selling our TV rights to pay-TV, like everyone else, we would generate four times as much revenue. And we could give all the tickets away, but they would still end up on the black market.

“As FIFA president we have to strike a balance. We invest in countries where no one else does — South Sudan, Bhutan. No one else is doing this.”

For now, that much is true. In football terms, no one else has the remit or the money. And, given how deeply FIFA is entrenched within the sport, the chances of a breakaway seem remote.

Although discontent has rarely been higher, unless a federation, alliance of countries or prominent individual grasps the nettle, the chances of reform seem only marginally less slim than before.

Edited by: Chuck Penfold

This article was first published on July 2 and updated on July 7 to reflect developments at the World Cup.

The Big Ten and SEC appear to want the pooling of media rights to be optional in the ‘Protect College Sports Act’ in Congress.

Are they genuine in their efforts or is it all for show?

On today’s episode of Locked On College Football, I am joined by ‘Locked On Sooners’ host John Williams.

Will Oklahoma’s 2026 schedule let them return to the Playoff? S

San Diego State hopes to be a Pac-12 contender this Fall in their third season under Sean Lewis.

What’s a reasonable expectation for their 2026 record in the new-look league?

03:38 Debating conference expansion options
09:30 Discussing Oklahoma’s 2026 football schedule
10:46 Discussing the team’s offensive struggles
15:18 Potential upset games discussion
18:32 Discussing Oklahoma’s early season challenges
23:27 Discussing San Diego State schedule
28:50 San Diego State vs Washington State
30:42 Predicting game outcome

/ @lockedoncollegefootball  

The 2026 NFL Draft is long over. Free agency is in the rearview mirror, and so is the NFL offseason. Now, we await training camp, with every NFL team scheduled to report in the next few weeks.

In the meantime, there isn’t much going on around the NFL. Well, unless you’re following the Brandon Aiyuk drama, which seems to have new material every other day.

Advertisement

While we are in the calm before the storm, Zachary Pereles of CBS Sports recently looked back at the 2024 NFL Draft. Specifically, Pereles performed a “2024 redraft.” That is the draft where six quarterbacks were selected among the first 12 picks.

It’s still early, but it looks like four of those quarterback picks were home runs: No. 1 Caleb Williams (Bears), No. 2 Jayden Daniels (Commanders), No. 3 Drake Maye (Patriots) and No. 12 Bo Nix (Broncos). Daniels and Nix were the top rookies, with Daniels having arguably the greatest rookie season in NFL history, leading the Commanders to the NFC Championship Game.

Daniels battled injuries last season, missing 10 games. However, Maye and Williams took a big leap, with both leading their respective teams to the playoffs. Maye even led New England to the Super Bowl. Nix led the Broncos to the AFC’s No. 1 seed, but was injured in the AFC Divisional Round.

So, where would these players land in this CBS redraft?

Advertisement

Here’s Pereles’ top-three picks:

• 3. New England Patriots: Jayden Daniels

Pereles offered the following on Washington selecting Williams:

The Commanders would gladly “settle” for Williams here. He took his game to another level last year by cutting way down on negative plays — especially sacks — and improving massively as a pocket navigator and scrambler. This is his biggest advantage over Maye, who still must improve his pressure mitigation. Williams has always taken excellent care of the ball as a passer, even during his difficult rookie year, and his out-of-structure creation is jaw-dropping.

Here’s his assessment of Daniels going No. 3:

If this article had come at this time out last year, Daniels would likely be No. 1. Instead, he falls all the way to No. 3! (Please note extreme sarcasm here; all three of these guys are great.) Daniels’ electrifying rookie season can’t be forgotten, but his second-year struggles — with injuries, a fall off in accuracy and less-than-ideal surroundings — can’t be completely overlooked, either.

If Washington had the chance to do this over, it would take Daniels again. I’m pretty confident the Bears would also stick with Williams. This redraft is proof of how our world is full of “what have you done for me lately?” Daniels is somehow viewed as No. 3 in this class because last season has him on a mission in 2026. He’s already said he’s done talking about 2025.

Let’s talk about last season’s playoffs. The Patriots made it to the Super Bowl despite Maye. He struggled in all four games, completing 58% of his passes with six touchdowns, four interceptions, and seven fumbles. He had an 82.2 QB rating and a 40 QBR.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Williams completed 52% of his passes, with four touchdowns and five interceptions. He had a 65.9 QB rating and a 53.4 QBR.

While Daniels didn’t make the playoffs last season, let’s revisit his 2024 playoff run. He completed 66% of his passes in three playoff games, with 822 yards, five touchdowns and one interception. He led the game-winning drive on the road at Tampa Bay in the NFC Wild-Card Round, and led the Commanders to a blowout road win over No. 1 seed Detroit in the NFC Divisional Round. Daniels had a 97.9 QB rating and an 84.2 QBR. He also rushed for 135 yards and one touchdown.

All QB-needy teams in the NFL would be happy with any of these three young franchise passers. But the Commanders still believe they’ve got the best of the bunch.

This article originally appeared on Commanders Wire: 2024 NFL redraft proves recency bias against Jayden Daniels