Daniel Ricciardo left to ponder why he was ‘not competitive’ at the British Grand Prix daniel,ricciardo,left,to,ponder,why,he,was,not,competitive,at,the,british,grand,prix,sbnation,com,front-page,formula-one


One of Formula 1’s most iconic figures climbed to the top step of the podium Sunday at Silverstone, as Lewis Hamilton finally broke through into the winner’s column in the British Grand Prix. It was the seven-time champion’s first victory since the penultimate race of the 2021 F1 season.

However, another transformative figure in the sport was left to wonder where things went wrong as he came across the line down in 13th.

Daniel Ricciardo, who was on the back foot almost the entire week in Silverstone, finished outside the points Sunday at the British Grand Prix. Speaking after the race, the Australian driver — and one of the most popular figures in the sport — was left to ponder what might have happened.

“It was a mixed conditions race which was exciting; ultimately grabbing some opportunities, but unfortunately, we were not competitive,” said Ricciardo in the team’s post-race report. “It was one of those days where we struggled more than we should have, so we’ll try to get into it and figure out why. In the last three weekends, I think we have lost out a little bit on the latest upgrades battle compared to some of our competitors in the midfield, so we’ve got some work to do looking at the next races.

“It’s good now to have a week off for all of us to reset and come back to Budapest which is a completely different circuit.”

Speaking with Lawrence Barretto in the television pen after the race, Ricciardo elaborated on how he felt in the car, highlighting how the pace was simply not there for his RB01 this week in Silverstone.

“I felt like we struggled more than we should have,” said Ricciardo. “I know that this isn’t necessarily going to be a real competitive circuit for us. But I still felt [relatively speaking] we struggled more. [So we’ll] try and get into it and figure out why that was.”

Looking ahead to the Hungarian Grand Prix, Ricciardo outlined how the team needs to “rectify some weaknesses” before the grid is back in action in Budapest.

“I think compared to some of our competitors in the midfield, we have lost out a little bit in the latest upgrade battle,” said Ricciardo. “I think Budapest is [a] completely different circuit. So let’s see.

“But yeah, it’s not enough for us just to be like ‘that track will suit us and we’ll be ok.’

“We obviously got to rectify some weaknesses and I’ll obviously look at my race and figure out where I lack the pace, but there were times we were like missing about eight-tenths a lap and I didn’t really feel like that was there.

“So, yeah, just one of those days.”

And with that, Ricciardo was off, left to ponder where he and Visa Cash App RB F1 Team can find those critical eight-tenths.

Why Bronny James getting a 4-year, $7.9M contract from the Lakers is no big deal why,bronny,james,getting,a,year,m,contract,from,the,lakers,is,no,big,deal,sbnation,com,front-page,nba


The Lakers wasted no time in doing exactly what we knew they were doing: Signing Bronny James to a contract. It just so happened that he became the first second round pick to sign, a four-year deal, and with the new CBA people saw the announcement and began to lose it.

On the surface this seems beyond ludicrous. To be fair, it is the largest contract of all time given to a second round rookie pick — but it has nothing to do with LeBron or nepotism; it’s just the new normal of the 2023 CBA. The minimum annual salary for a 4-year deal is exactly what Bronny received, which means the total money side of this had nothing to do with who his dad is. The truth is that revenues are rising, the salary cap is expanding — and that’s why we keep seeing new records for contracts, with the trickle down effect being that rookies are getting more money as a result.

Pelle Larsson, the first second-rounder to sign this year got a three-year, $5.4 million deal from the Miami Heat — and had they added a fourth year he would have been on the exact same contract as Bronny James.

Now, we can certainly argue about the nature of this deal. A second round pick with as many questions as Bronny getting a contract before Summer League is definitely a perk of being LeBron’s son — but in the grand scheme of things it’s really a minor issue. He’s the No. 55 pick, who probably won’t contribute much, and earning just under $2M a year is relative chump change, commensurate with what the majority of deep rotation guys will make this season.

In the end this is all no harm, no foul. LeBron is going to ride out his career in Los Angeles, play with his son, continue with business ventures in the city — and sail off into the sunset.

Hard Knocks revealed why Giants let Saquon Barkley go in NFL free agency hard,knocks,revealed,why,giants,let,saquon,barkley,go,in,nfl,free,agency,sbnation,com,front-page,nfl,nfl-free-agency,hard-knocks,draftkings


Odds are you are familiar with the NFL Films product of Hard Knocks, a documentary series that chronicles a team throughout the course of training camp and the preseason and ultimately ends right as the regular season begins.

Recently NFL Films has produced an in-season version of the show where they follow teams throughout the course of an NFL season. That is pretty self-explanatory.

Tuesday night saw the debut of a new version of the show. This latest HK follows the New York Giants over the initial part of this offseason and focuses on how the G-Men assembled their staff and team. It is always interesting to get these peeks behind the curtain and now we got a peek at an area that was previous off limits.

If you are a HK veteran like myself then in watching it a lot of things likely feel the same to you. Part of the challenge of this show is that there is no breaking news of any kind given that when anything massive happens it is then given to us in the next episode. There is relatively little shock value.

This is true for the Giants as we obviously know what they did throughout all of free agency and the NFL Draft; however, the debut episode was a lot about something that they didn’t do… pay running back Saquon Barkley.

New York selected Barkley with the second overall pick in 2018 and went through quite the song and dance with him once they finally got down to contractual negotiations. Barkley played on the franchise tag in 2023 so the time for a serious decision arrived this offseason and the Giants watched him walk in free agency to a division rival in the Philadelphia Eagles.

This subject is touched on throughout the episode but in the closing minutes Giants GM Joe Schoen is having a conversation with his brain trust and ultimately notes that they are not paying their quarterback in Daniel Jones what they are for him to hand the ball off.

Tim McDonnell, Director of Player Personnel: Take this a step further. We lose Saquon right… what’s our identity going to be on offense now? What’s our plan? What’s the next step of that, I guess is what I’m thinking. We’re losing… our explosiveness, our touchdowns. Quarterback, if it’s Daniel, depends on the run game.

Joe Schoen, General Manager: We’ve got to upgrade the offensive line and you’re paying the guy $40M. It’s not to hand the ball off to a $12M back. My plan is address the offensive line at some point here in free agency. We’re sitting at 6, there’s a chance there’s an offensive weapon there. This is the year for Daniel. The plan all along was give him a couple of years. Is he our guy for the next 10 years or do we need to pivot and find somebody else?”

To be clear this conversation was had before the Giants ultimately saw Saquon leave, remember that NFL Films is shooting these events in real time.

The benefit of hindsight tells us that the Giants did exactly what Schoen said in that they signed several offensive linemen in free agency (headlined by Jon Runyan) and took LSU wide receiver Malik Nabers at number 6 overall in the 2024 NFL Draft.

As someone who roots for and covers the Dallas Cowboys I have taken a great amount of joy in laughing at the Giants and their decision-making for the last 15 or so years, but if we are fair about all of this then they did absolutely nothing wrong.

I’ll acknowledge that the Giants don’t exactly have the benefit of the doubt and that Daniel Jones is not exactly someone I would strongly believe in personally, but this is still the NFL and building around the quarterback is the most logical way forward. In fact the Giants failed miserably at trying to build around Saquon Barkley for all of his Giants career.

People will laugh and roll their eyes at what the Giants did especially because Howie Roseman is the Eagles’ general manager and is regarded as being very good at his job, so it looks like the Giants made a huge mistake that the Eagles capitalized on. Again, benefit of the doubt type stuff.

But the Giants finally made the hard decision that they avoided for so long. Good for them I guess.

NFL teams don’t need a No. 1 receiver and here’s why nfl,teams,don,t,need,a,no,receiver,and,here,s,why,sbnation,com,front-page,nfl,dot-com-grid-coverage


Jordan Love of the Green Bay Packers is one of the NFL’s most highly-regarded young quarterbacks, and that’s in part because of the performance he put on in the second half of the 2023 season. From Week 10 through the Packers’ 24-21 divisional round loss to the San Francisco 49ers, Love completed 254 of 374 passes (67.9%) for 2,904 yards (7.8 yards per attempt), 25 touchdowns, five interceptions, and a passer rating of 107.7.

Moreover, Love did all of that without the benefit of what most people would consider a true No. 1 receiver. The Packers did have estimable targets in Jayden Reed, Romeo Doubs, Tucker Kraft, and Dontayvion Wicks, but there’s nobody in that receiver/tight end group who scares opposing defenses to the point where defenses will be automatically arrayed against them.

And furthermore, that’s the way Love wants it.

“I think you don’t have to have a No. 1 receiver,” Love said on June 4. “I think it works out well when you can spread the ball out and you’ve got different guys making different plays and you can put them in different areas.

“I think it puts a lot more stress on the defense and the calls that they can get in, so I think in the long run it helps us not having a No. 1 guy, a true No. 1 guy, but I think all those guys can step up and be the one any given day.”

For Love, it gives him the freedom to hit the guy who’s open in the progression, as opposed to leaning too often on the alpha dog.

“I can just play the play.”

During an appearance on Colin Cowherd’s show on July 19, Tom Brady presented the hypothetical alternative: What if you have a No. 1 receiver, and you have to throttle your entire passing game around him?

“You always felt like you had to do something to get them the ball,” Brady said about the specter of a true No. 1 guy. “I want him to keep running hard. I want him to be ready for when the ball does come.”

“The last thing you want is your No. 1 receiver to go two-and-a-half quarters into a game and not see a ball… ‘cause he’s going to get discouraged.”

“He’s got to go out there and break the huddle, run out 25 yards to his alignment, run down the field as fast as he can and try to get open, then back to the huddle. It’s a lot of effort that he’s putting in to not getting the ball… reward that guy earlier in the game.”

It’s interesting that for the most part, Brady got his thing done at a GOAT level without the benefit of a true No.1 receiver. Yes, he had Randy Moss for a few seasons, and there was Rob Gronkowski at his best, but the best quarterback ever to play the position had as many seasons without those force multipliers as he did with them.

Brady’s comments about how that true alpha receiver affects the quarterback’s mindset are interesting in that the NFL seems to be trending away from the No. 1 receiver as a must.

How do we define a ‘No. 1 receiver’?

True No. 1 receivers aren’t always aligned outside in isolated situations, but there needs to be enough of that to make it obvious that this is the guy. They must be able to beat press coverage at the line of scrimmage, and they need to be able to run away from tight match coverage against the NFL’s best cornerbacks. If they’re bracketed by an opposing defense, they must have answers against it. And whether it’s through demon speed or incredible route acumen (ideally both), they need to be the one guy their quarterback can always go to.

Here’s the problem: It doesn’t always work. And even if it does, how many true top guys are there at any given point in the league? Justin Jefferson of the Minnesota Vikings. Ja’Marr Chase of the Cincinnati Bengals. Tyreek Hill of the Miami Dolphins. Mike Evans of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Davante Adams of the Las Vegas Raiders. Depending on how broad you want to be with the definition, there are at most maybe 10-15 receivers in the league at any time who are true field-tilters in that sense.

NFL teams are realizing this, and instead of going all in on one guy in the hope that he’s The Guy, they’re moving their resources around, and relying more on advanced schemes and concerts to get it done.

Making No. 1 receivers out of the aggregate

“It’s more about the collective unit of all those guys and just the rapport that they’re building with Jordan throughout the course of the offseason,” Packers head coach Matt LaFleur said of his receiver group, right around the time Love made his interesting proclamation. “I’m excited to get to training camp with them.

“All those guys had their moments where they were the leading receiver in a game. I feel really good about the collective unit. The hardest part is we feel so good about them, it’s hard to get everybody the amount of touches that you’d like to get, but that’s a good problem to have.”

It’s a good problem to have when you’re not dependent on one receiver, and you can scheme your receivers open to their best abilities. Last season, Jayden Reed and Romeo Doubs tied for the Packers’ lead in receptions on passes of 20 or more air yards – nine each, and on 19 targets each. LaFleur used Reed’s sneaky get-up speed to exploit opposing defenses in motion concepts, as shown on this 32-yard catch against the Bears in the regular-season finale.

Doubs got more outside targets than Reed did, and his ability to leverage his route precision against cornerbacks and safeties made him an ideal foil in that regard. Here against the Dallas Cowboys in last season’s wild-card win, the Packers ran a similar concept with Reed running motion. But in this case, Doubs ran the out-cut at 15 yards while Reed and Bo Melton ran the vertical routes. It was a great beater for the Cover-3 defense the Cowboys were running, and it resulted in a 39-yard gain. Is the lack of a No. 1 receiver a freeing component for the Packers’ offense? The tape seems to back it up.

You can win a Super Bowl (several, actually) without an alpha dog

The Kansas City Chiefs just won their third Super Bowl in the last five seasons, and without Steve Spagnuolo’s defense, they might not have even made the playoffs. Patrick Mahomes had to make a lot of chicken salad out of other things in the 2023 campaign, because outside of Travis Kelce, it could be argued that the Chiefs didn’t even have a consistent No. 2 receiver. The Chiefs tried to bring more to that equation in free agency with Marquise “Hollywood” Brown, and in the draft with Texas’ Xavier Worthy, but it remains to be seen whether either Brown or Worthy can be an alpha dog in Andy Reid’s offense.

It also remains to be seen whether Reid sees it as a priority.

Last season, per Sports Info Solutions, the Chiefs led the NFL in dropbacks with pre-snap motion with 546. Mahomes completed 336 passes in 489 attempts with motion for 3,389 yards, 1,219 air yards, 23 touchdowns, eight interceptions, and a passer rating of 109.9. Without motion, Mahomes completed 169 of 257 passes for 1,845 yards, 850 air yards, 10 touchdowns, seven interceptions, and a passer rating of 88.4. The Chiefs knew they didn’t have the kinds of receivers who could consistently separate without schematic help, so they gave them as much schematic help as possible.

Mahomes also had the NFL’s most passing attempts with three tight ends on the field – 46, of which he completed 30 for 391 yards, 115 air yards, two touchdowns, two interceptions, and a passer rating of 88.2. Not the best numbers, but the point remains: If the Chiefs didn’t have ideal targets, they were going to do their level best to transcend that with deployment and scheme.

How else do coaches work around a lack of alpha receivers?

San Francisco 49ers fans might argue the point that their team doesn’t have a true No. 1 receiver, but unless you think that Brandon Aiyuk is one, it’s a tough point to contend. I think that Aiyuk is an ideal 1A receiver – he does a ton in Kyle Shanahan’s concepts, and one of those concepts is condensed splits that allow receivers to find more room on the outside of the formation. Per Pro Football Focus, the 49ers led the league with 829 snaps in formations where receivers were tighter to the formation. The Los Angeles Rams ranked second with 730, and that’s another team where the No. 1 receiver argument becomes complicated.

285 of San Francisco’s passing plays came out of condensed formations last season, and the reasoning was clear. Brock Purdy had 20 explosive completions out of those tighter splits in the 2023 season.

Detroit Lions offensive coordinator Ben Johnson has been turning down head coaching jobs of late – perhaps because he realizes that as much as he’s done with his playbook to amplify Detroit’s offense, he’ll be able to pick his spot in a relative sense. Now, some might say that Amon-Ra St. Brown is a No. 1 receiver. The Lions certainly paid him that way with the four-year, $120.01-million contract extension with $77 million guaranteed St. Brown got in April, but St. Brown presents an Aiyuk-like case of a very good receiver whose efforts are amplified by scheme. That’s not to denigrate Brown at all – it’s more a realistic analysis of his attributes.

In Johnson’s offense, the Lions ran a lot of 11 personnel (one running back, one tight end, three receivers) and 12 personnel (one running back, two tight ends, two receivers). They ranked third in 3×1 formation snaps behind the Chiefs and the Washington Commanders with 515, and they ranked third in 2×2 formation snaps behind the Philadelphia Eagles and the Indianapolis Colts with 627. Factor in Johnson’s multi-faceted run game, and there isn’t one book on the Lions’ offense – making everything more difficult to read.

And in the end, maybe that’s the whole point in today’s NFL. More than ever, the league is about spacing and matchups more than this set of routes versus that kind of coverage. NFL offensive coordinators are trying everything possible to win those particular battles, and without a true No. 1 receiver, and all the advantages and limitations therein, maybe it’s that much more difficult for defenses to understand what a passing game is trying to accomplish.

In a game where milliseconds play out like minutes, any kind of hesitation is a big deal.

So yes, it’s great to have a No. 1 receiver if you can identify, develop, and keep one. But more and more, the NFL’s best offensive minds are looking for workarounds to that formerly incontrovertible ideal.

Why NFL fans still have to wait regarding the ‘Sunday Ticket’ lawsuit why,nfl,fans,still,have,to,wait,regarding,the,sunday,ticket,lawsuit,sbnation,com,front-page,nfl


A jury in federal court in California decided on Thursday that the NFL and its member teams violated federal antitrust laws with the “Sunday Ticket” package. Following Thursday’s historic jury verdict against the NFL and its member teams — that could have the league on the hook for over $14 billion in damages to plaintiffs, including individual fans and commercial establishments who bought “Sunday Ticket” — many are wondering when individual team packages could hit the airwaves, as well as when they might see a check.

To quote the great Lee Corso, “not so fast my friend.”

Keeping this in football terms, the verdict is akin to the league getting sacked for a huge loss. You might even say they are facing third and long.

But they might not be punting anytime soon, and we are in the first quarter of a game that likely comes down to the final play.

And maybe even overtime.

So let’s take a moment to talk about what could happen next, and where this might all ultimately end up. But before we dive in it is important to note that while I was not the world’s greatest attorney — the fact that I’m now a sports writer and no longer practicing law speaks to that point — I did spend a decade practicing civil litigation. While I never practiced in the Ninth Circuit, I do have some appellate experience on my resume, which is lying around here somewhere …

What happens next?

NFL fans are about to get a crash course in complex civil litigation, and the associated calendar and scheduling issues associated with such matters.

At the outset, it seems worth mentioning that this case was originally filed in 2015. That’s right, it took almost a decade to get to this point.

And we might still be in the first quarter.

The next step following this verdict comes at the end of July. That is when Judge Philip Gutierrez, who was the trial judge in this matter, will hear post-trial motions. That hearing is set for July 31.

The NFL will likely file motions along various lines, including a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV). Simply put, this is a motion arguing that no reasonable jury could have found what the jury in this case did, given all the facts that were elicited at trial.

In football terms, this is probably on par with a Hail Mary, but it is important to note that at certain points in this trial Judge Gutierrez expressed some skepticism — if not downright frustration — with the case set forth by the plaintiffs. At one point Judge Gutierrez went as far as telling plaintiffs’ counsel “[y]ou really have nothing” regarding their case, and at another point chastised plaintiffs’ counsel for overcomplicating the trial. “The way you have tried this case is far from simple,” Gutierrez told attorneys representing the subscribers. “This case has turned into 25 hours of depositions and gobbledygook. … This case has gone in a direction it shouldn’t have gone.”

Still, that does not mean that Judge Gutierrez will be inclined to completely set aside the verdict, and there are other pathways the league can explore at the post-trial hearing. They can file a motion seeking remittitur, arguing that the damages award in this case rendered by the jury is excessive.

Finally, as set forth by Michael McCann in his analysis of where the case stands, the NFL could seek to have Judge Gutierrez table any potential changes to the “Sunday Ticket” structure until the case reaches its full resolution.

Regardless of what Judge Gutierrez decides to do — whether on July 31 or sometime after if he takes matters under advisement to render decisions on a later date — the league is likely going to appeal this matter to the Ninth Circuit. In a statement following the verdict, the league indicated that they would “ … certainly contest this decision as we believe that the class action claims in this case are baseless and without merit.”

Again, they are not punting anytime soon.

Should they appeal this matter to the Ninth Circuit, we are then talking about months, if not longer, for the Ninth Circuit to weigh in on the case. As noted by McCann in his above analysis, “ … Ninth Circuit appeals often take in the ballpark of a year-and-half to nearly three years.” And the league would simply wait on making any changes to their “Sunday Ticket” structure until, as they would likely argue, the case “reaches a full-and-final resolution.”

But we might not get that from the Ninth Circuit.

Yes, this could go to the Supreme Court.

Could this really go to the Supreme Court?

An often-used joke in everyday life, when someone endures the slightest of grievances, is the line “I’m taking this to the Supreme Court.”

That might actually happen here.

The reason? As my own Constitutional Law professor Michael Gerhardt drilled into my brain the first semester of law school, the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of questions of federal law. And while the case against the league is fascinating concerning what it could mean for the NFL and its fans, there is actually a fairly interesting — if dry — federal question at issue here.

That is the current applicability of the Sports Broadcasting Act, found in 15 US Code Sections 1291-1295.

Passed in 1961 and signed into law by President John F. Kennedy, the SBA adjusted federal antitrust law to allow sports leagues to pool broadcasting rights of all their teams and sign exclusive league-wide deals with networks.

In the case at hand, Plaintiffs argued that the SBA does not apply to the “Sunday Ticket” package because the SBA applies to “over-the-air” broadcasts, and not cable or satellite packages. In contrast, the league asserted that the SBA barred the Plaintiffs’ claims, arguing that the language of the SBA enables the league to set up a service such as “Sunday Ticket.”

Judge Gutierrez previously brushed this claim by the league aside. In his earlier decision denying the NFL’s Motion for Summary Judgement, Judge Gutierrez cited earlier decisions by the Ninth Circuit in doing so:

“And the Ninth Circuit expressly distinguished between “the NFL’s collective sale of telecast rights to free, over-the-air television networks [which] was squarely covered by the SBA” with “league contracts with cable or satellite television services, for which subscribers are charged a fee,” which the SBA does not exempt from antitrust liability.”

This is the kind of federal law question that the Supreme Court might want to weigh in on, given the direction sports broadcasting is moving right now, toward more cable and satellite television services.

Which would mean an even longer delay to a final resolution.

What happens in the interim?

What happens in the interim, you might ask?

We wait.

Because the wheels of civil litigation grind slowly, there is likely a post-trial process that will play out over months if not years.

So if you are a previous subscriber to “Sunday Ticket” on DirecTV, you might not want to be running to the mailbox every day waiting for a check.

Alex Morgan didn’t make the U.S. Olympic women’s soccer roster. Here’s why alex,morgan,didn,t,make,the,u,s,olympic,women,s,soccer,roster,here,s,why,sbnation,com,front-page,soccer,united-states-womens-national-team,all-womens-sports,womens-soccer,uswnt-coverage

Alex Morgan didnt make the US Olympic womens soccer roster


Alex Morgan will not represent the United States in a major international competition for the first time in nearly 20 years.

When the U.S. women’s national team heads to France later this month, Morgan, one of the best to wear the uniform, will not be on the plane as the team looks to chase gold at the upcoming Summer Games, after being left off women’s coach Emma Hayes’ 18-person roster.

Morgan who earned her first entry for the senior women’s roster in 2010, has been in 224 appearances for her country with 123 goals — and most notably would’ve been the only player on Hayes’ current roster with an Olympic gold medal.

On Wednesday, Morgan took to X, formerly known as Twitter to express her dismay but noted that she’s more than prepared to cheer on the squad from abroad.

“Today, I’m disappointed about not having the opportunity to represent our country on the Olympic stage,” Morgan wrote. “This will always be a tournament that is close to my heart and I take immense pride anytime I put on the crest. In less than a month, I look forward to supporting this team alongside the rest of our country.”

Morgan is one of the most prolific goalscorers in U.S. Soccer history — men or women — and was a part of the squad that captured a fourth gold medal at the 2012 Summer Games in London.

As for Hayes, she was matter-of-fact in her decision to leave Morgan off the Olympic roster, citing the number of players allowed on an Olympic roster (teams can carry just 16 field players and two goalkeepers) and her desire to “go in another direction.

“Her record speaks for itself,” Hayes said of Morgan during a virtual press conference on Wednesday. “But I wanted to go in another direction and select other players.”

The U.S. attacking corps features an all-NWSL collective who have found success this year for club and country. Trinity Rodman (Washington Spirit), Crystal Dunn (Gotham FC), Mallory Swanson (Chicago Red Stars), Jaedyn Shaw, Morgan’s teammate on the San Diego Wave and most notably Sophia Smith, the latter who many consider next up in a long line of star USWNT forwards over the years.

There’s excitement around what Sophia Smith will bring in to the Olympics, the latest in a line of standout U.S. women’s forwards.
Photo by Erin Chang/ISI Photos/USSF/Getty Images for USSF

“I think the biggest factor is there are 16 outfield players to play a lot of games … over a 17-day period,” said Hayes. “But I also think, you know, there are players on the roster in the forward areas that are performing well, and, you know, the decision to take those players was one that we certainly deliberated over.”

Hayes who made her coaching debut on June 1, has had just two games — both against the same competition in South Korea to prepare for the Games and evaluate a roster she feels “is balanced.”

Fans will get a first look at the Olympic roster later this month in a pair of tune-up games against Mexico on July 13 (3:30 p.m. ET, TNT), and Costa Rica on June 16 (7:30 p.m. ET, TNT) before opening group play in the Olympics on July 25 against Zambia in Nice, France (3 p.m. ET, USA Network).

“Having a roster that could adapt is essential [as] you have a tight turnaround between games,” said Hayes. “Having players on the roster that could play more than one position mattered with squad depth. I’ve considered all the factors that we’re going to need throughout the Olympics and I think it’s a balanced roster; one that I’m really happy with.”