Culture
NBA free agency: Russell Westbrook, Quentin Grimes and the odd situations that loom
Get ready for a different kind of free agency this summer: Less wild, perhaps, but weirder.
At first, the 2025 NBA free-agent class doesn’t exactly overwhelm you with front-line talent. This isn’t the year for superstars holding meetings in the Hamptons while teams wait on pins and needles for franchise-altering decisions. Only one likely All-NBA selection can become a free agent this summer, and that one (the Los Angeles Lakers’ LeBron James) isn’t going anywhere. The next-best potential free agent, the Dallas Mavericks’ Kyrie Irving, turns 33 soon and just tore his ACL.
However, what the free-agent class lacks in superstar talent, it makes up for in sheer quirkiness. Between the most recent collective bargaining agreement, some existing rules that rarely came into play before and several players massively outplaying small contracts, this summer could offer some real financial puzzles for front offices.
Here’s a preview of some of the more interesting conundrums as we truck toward the offseason:
Ty Jerome’s unlikely breakout
Jerome might have the best value non-rookie contract in the league; the Cleveland Cavaliers’ breakout super sub only makes $2.56 million after signing a two-year deal with the Cavs in 2023.
The issue this summer is that the Cavs only have early Bird rights on him as a free agent because of that two-year deal. Nobody ever considered the possibility that Jerome would be so awesome that “only” being able to pay him $14 million next season would make him a potential flight risk, but here we are.
Jerome is having one of the most unlikely breakout seasons in league annals, suddenly emerging in his sixth season out of Virginia (wahoowa!) as a serious contender for both the Sixth Man of the Year and Most Improved Player awards. He’s shooting 41.8 percent from 3 and an unfathomable 55.6 percent from floater range, boasts the league’s 10th-highest steal rate among players with at least 1,000 minutes, averages nearly three assists for every turnover and has compiled a 20.1 PER for a team that’s a phenomenal 56-13.
Knowing the Cavs can only get to $14 million, if you’re a team like the Brooklyn Nets or Chicago Bulls that has some cap space this summer, is it out of the question to offer Jerome $20 million a year? He’s 27, so his next deal would pay him for his prime years.
The cap rules on paying Jerome are only half the problem for Cleveland. The other half is … what if he re-signs? Locking up Jerome at that $14 million number becomes a very expensive proposition for the Cavs, who are plunging deep into the luxury tax next year regardless because of Evan Mobley’s likely supermax extension.
Paying Jerome market-rate money on top of that would blast Cleveland way past the second-apron threshold. While it’s possible other trades could soften the blow (what would you give me for a lightly used Isaac Okoro?), it’s clear Jerome’s unlikely success has added another layer to what was already a tricky cap problem facing Cleveland.
Could he take a cheapo one-plus-one deal that would let the Cavs pay him as a Bird rights free agent a year from now? That might be the only palatable endgame from Cleveland’s side, but it’s tough to ask a guy who has never been paid to wait another year for his bag.
Ty Jerome has taken a major leap in Year 6. (Gary A. Vasquez / Imagn Images)
Russell Westbrook’s option
Westbrook is thriving in Denver, yet he and the Nuggets face a very interesting fork in the road. He has a player option for 2025-26 for $3.5 million, and he’s pretty clearly worth massively more than this, at least to the Nuggets. That’s good news for this season but bad news once we get to the summer.
Westbrook opting out feels like a no-brainer, but Denver has few mechanisms for paying him much more. The best possibility is probably to use its taxpayer midlevel exception, which would cap the Nuggets at the second apron but would allow them to pay Westbrook a projected $5.7 million in 2025-26. A two-year deal with a player option would let him opt out of that contract again in 2026 to get more jelly as an early Bird free agent.
Anything more than $5.7 million requires some serious digging. For instance, getting to the point where the Nuggets could pay Westbrook some or all of the projected $14.1 million nontaxpayer midlevel exception would require the Nuggets to shed about $10 million in other salaries to get themselves below the first apron.
That would most likely be accomplished by trading Dario Šarić (who, incredibly, was signed for more money than Westbrook last summer) and Zeke Nnaji (who is playing better of late but still owed $23 million over the next three years). The Nuggets, however, have no draft picks left to incentivize a trade, because they’ve already used so many to offload other bad contracts. They can trade their two 2032 picks after the draft, but do they really want to ditch those picks already? At what price point is it worth just trying to find their next Westbrook?
Jake LaRavia’s contract ceiling
The Sacramento Kings acquired LaRavia from the Memphis Grizzlies with a second-round pick at the trade deadline, a needed piece in a lineup that lacked size at the forward spot.
The conundrum for Kings fans is that they want a “Goldilocks” LaRavia … one who plays well but not too well. As a result of Memphis declining his fourth-year option for 2025-26 this past fall, LaRavia is limited in free agency to re-signing for that declined fourth-year salary of $5,163,127. That limit carried over in the trade; neither Memphis nor Sacramento can pay him more than this but 28 other teams can.
That puts Sacramento at a disadvantage in free agency, but the Kings have a way to get that advantage back if LaRavia doesn’t play too well. The Kings could give him a two-year deal with a second-year player option that starts at that $5.16 million figure; he could then opt out of the second year in 2026 if he has a good year and would have full Bird rights with the Kings and be able to re-sign for any amount.
Obviously, that goes out the window if somebody drops a full midlevel exception offer on him this summer, but thus far, it seems like LaRavia will thread the needle where nobody values him at that amount.
Guerschon Yabusele’s minimum
The Dancing Bear hasn’t played quite as well as Westbrook, but he’s in a similar situation: Playing well enough on a short deal for a taxed-out team that keeping him will be a bit of a pickle.
Yabusele is on a one-year minimum deal; he has non-Bird rights, and the most he can get from Philly without using exception money is a 20 percent raise on his minimum for next year, or $2.85 million. His market value seems pretty clearly more than that, although there is a glimmer of possibility that the Sixers could get him to sign a one-plus-one deal that lets him try free agency again next summer.
As with Westbrook above, the cleanest solution would be for the Sixers to re-sign Yabusele with their taxpayer midlevel exception of $5.7 million. The problem is that it would cap the Sixers at the second apron, and they might need that money for…
Quentin Grimes, superstar
One of the most bizarre situations in the league is happening in Philadelphia right now, where the Sixers are simultaneously navigating a tank job to possibly keep a top-six protected pick and a contract push from Grimes as he hits restricted free agency. A low-usage role player in his first three seasons, Grimes had stepped things up a bit in 47 games in Dallas this season, but he didn’t really blow up until he got to Philly at the trade deadline.
On a denuded Sixers roster with three injured All-Stars, Grimes has averaged 21.8 points while making shots from everywhere — he’s shooting 39.5 percent on 3s and 60.1 percent on 2s, the latter a fairly incredible figure for a 6-foot-5 guard with middling athleticism.
At some point, you figure he’ll cool off a bit, but even after regressing his shooting to the mean, the stat line is impressive. (He’s also increased his rates of rebounds, blocks, steals and assists. Dude is balling.)
What does that mean for Grimes this summer? Being a restricted free agent might limit the market, but given the Sixers’ position vis-a-vis the luxury tax and aprons, teams might also be tempted to test the Sixers’ willingness to spend by dropping a big offer sheet. It could actually tempt a rival team to spend more, in the hopes of creating such a poisonous sheet that the Sixers run away shrieking. Right now, Brooklyn is the only team in a strong position to do this, but things can change before July 1; Grimes will only be 25 this summer, so as with Jerome above, a team would be buying his theoretical prime.
That takes us to the other aspect of Grimes’ situation. Paying him something on the order of $20 million a year would take the Sixers right to the second-apron line, assuming their three players with options choose to pick them up. (Kelly Oubre, Andre Drummond and Eric Gordon have player options worth a total of $17 million; none set hearts aflame with their play in 2024-25.)
That is, unless the Sixers keep their pick, which would add several million to their cap number (the fourth pick will make $8.4 million, for instance) and tighten the screws in other places. In particular, it would seemingly be very difficult to keep both Grimes and Yabusele at their market rates with a top-six pick in the draft.
This takes us back to the tank. The Sixers are in quite a “race” with Toronto and Brooklyn for the fifth- through seventh-worst records in the league, with the three teams resorting to increasingly impressive hijinks to, um, keep up … except that Philly keeps playing Grimes. The Sixers have gone 4-17 since Feb. 4, but Grimes singlehandedly delivered one of the wins (a 44-point masterpiece against the Golden State Warriors) and nearly pulled out another when he hung 46 on the Houston Rockets in an overtime loss.
The difference between fifth and seventh might not seem like much, but it literally doubles the Sixers’ odds of keeping the pick (from 31.9 percent to 63.9 percent). If Grimes leads them to enough wins that the Sixers don’t keep the pick, there’s more money left to pay him!
Malik Beasley, shooting star
I’m not sure what the Pistons’ plans were for their non-max trove of cap space this summer (roughly $25 million), but I’m guessing “using it all to re-sign Malik Beasley” wasn’t anywhere on the list when they were mapping out scenarios last fall.
That was before Beasley basically turned into Stephen Curry from beyond the 3-point line. No, seriously. Beasley’s 16.2 3-point attempts per 100 possessions this season are second only to Curry’s 16.9, and Beasley has knocked down an incredible 41.9 percent of them.
Wait, it gets better: Beasley’s 6.8 3-point makes per 100 are the most ever for a player not named Curry — Steph has beaten it four times, but James Harden in 2018-19 is the only other player to reach 6.5 in a season of 1,500 or more minutes.
This, obviously, has made Beasley a very valuable player. Beasley signed a one-year deal worth $6 million last summer; there is no scenario where the Pistons can keep him for anything close to that. At a bare minimum, they would seemingly need to pay him the full nontaxpayer midlevel exception of $14.1 million; even if that contract didn’t require cap room, it would essentially nuke any cap-room scenarios for Detroit.
Fortunately, Detroit’s books are in a strong enough position that retaining Beasley should be fairly straightforward; the only question is deal length and player options. Would Beasley rather have a short deal with a player option to get more bread a year from now, or would he prefer the security of a longer deal?
Malik Beasley is having a season for the ages from 3. (Rick Osentoski / Imagn Images)
Moe Wagner and Orlando’s tight tax
The Magic have the full allotment of 15 players under contract for next season, have four draft picks this June and are $11 million over the projected tax line. All of that would make it seem unlikely that they would pick up Mo Wagner’s $11 million team option, especially since he’s out with a torn ACL.
However, all may not be as it appears. Wagner is a highly-valued player in Orlando, and not just because he’s the brother (and housemate!) of Magic star Franz Wagner; his injury more or less marked the turning point in the Magic’s season. (They were 18-12 at the time and 14-25 since.)
For one, the Magic have other options they can decline to get the roster down to reasonable size. Declining options on Gary Harris and little-used Cory Joseph and Caleb Houstan would put them under the projected tax (at least until the draft picks put them back over) and open enough roster breathing room to bring back Wagner. Also, because the Magic would retain Bird rights on him, a cheap one-year deal with a second-year player option could be a palatable option for both sides; he could have his “rehab year” then get paid off his work in the second half of the season when he returns.
Either way, declining the option seems like the only play for Orlando. The question is what the Magic can do to retain somebody they would prefer to keep amid a tricky cap environment and a roster that, once Paolo Banchero’s likely max extension hits in 2026, will become fairly expensive.
Lakers decline-and-sign pathway
This little trick is likely to come up in the case of several teams dancing the first-apron tightrope, most notably with the Lakers and Dorian Finney-Smith.
The idea is that L.A. can get Finney-Smith to decline his player option for $15.4 million for 2025-26 in return for re-signing on a longer deal for less money. The risk of overpaying on the back end of the deal (Finney-Smith turns 32 this summer) is offset by managing the immediate tax situation by shaving a few million off his 2025-26 cap number.
The motivation for L.A. would be to leave enough wiggle room under the first apron to either use its nontaxpayer midlevel exception to sign a real center or to trade for one. It’s a tight squeeze right now, even if the Lakers decline Shake Milton’s $3 million nonguaranteed deal. They might even consider stretching Maxi Kleber’s $11 million to generate the necessary space, especially since they’re running out of draft picks to put into trades to incentivize a deal. (I’ll also note this option exists for James as well; there is no rule requiring him to sign for the max, and he actually took a slight haircut on that amount last summer to keep L.A. below the second apron and allow it to aggregate salary in trades. That decision has worked out very well, based on recent events.)
The Minnesota Timberwolves could potentially go this route, too, with Julius Randle, who has a $31 million player option for next season with incentives that could raise the value. Locking in a lower number for Randle on a long-term deal might make it easier to keep Naz Reid in free agency and still make Minnesota’s tricky cap math work in future seasons.
And then there are the Rockets. Houston has a similar issue with Fred VanVleet, except it’s a team option instead of a player option, so the Rockets have a lot more control over the situation. VanVleet is due $44.9 million next season, one where the Rockets are likely to push into the tax. Things don’t get any easier in the future, as their talented young players need to be paid (most notably Amen Thompson in the summer of 2027), but 2025-26 is a squeeze point unless VanVleet’s cap number goes way down.
Thus, locking in VanVleet at a lower number for a longer tenure has a lot of advantages for Houston. However, there’s a case to be made that the Rockets could go the complete opposite route by opting to pay him the $44.9 million, in return for extending his contract at a much lower number in the out years. That concept trades a single year of pain in 2025-26 in return for making the salary structure more manageable in the out years when Houston’s other young players will be ready to get paid. It’s a fascinating puzzle for the Rockets with no clear answer, beyond the obvious one that Houston still very much needs to keep VanVleet one way or another.
Decline-and-sign, discount version
Finally, you may have noticed an unusual number of players this season were signed off two-way deals into two-year contracts with second-year team options.
There’s a reason for that: The teams can decline the option and, as non-Bird free agents, re-sign the player to a much longer four-year deal worth up to 20 percent over the minimum. Given the limited likelihood of a bidding war on players of this ilk (and the protection of restricted free agency, just in case), it’s a good way for teams to play their hands. This is particularly true for those teams that either don’t have access to their nontaxpayer midlevel exception or want to save it for potential use at the trade deadline.
This category includes several rookie two-way players who have since been promoted to roster deals, such as Oklahoma City’s Ajay Mitchell, Golden State’s Quinten Post, New York’s Ariel Hukporti and Philadelphia’s Justin Edwards. All are likely looking at summer “decline-and-sign” situations that end with them returning to their present teams on three- or four-year deals at or near the minimum. (One slight exception: Mitchell got $3 million out of the Thunder’s room exception money and thus can sign for a starting salary of as much as $3.6 million if the option is declined.)
(Top photo of Russell Westbrook: Katelyn Mulcahy / Getty Images)
Culture
Video: 250 Years of Jane Austen, in Objects
new video loaded: 250 Years of Jane Austen, in Objects
By Jennifer Harlan, Sadie Stein, Claire Hogan, Laura Salaberry and Edward Vega
December 18, 2025
Culture
Try This Quiz and See How Much You Know About Jane Austen
“Window seat with garden view / A perfect nook to read a book / I’m lost in my Jane Austen…” sings Kristin Chenoweth in “The Girl in 14G” — what could be more ideal? Well, perhaps showing off your literary knowledge and getting a perfect score on this week’s super-size Book Review Quiz Bowl honoring the life, work and global influence of Jane Austen, who turns 250 today. In the 12 questions below, tap or click your answers to the questions. And no matter how you do, scroll on to the end, where you’ll find links to free e-book versions of her novels — and more.
Culture
Revisiting Jane Austen’s Cultural Impact for Her 250th Birthday
On Dec. 16, 1775, a girl was born in Steventon, England — the seventh of eight children — to a clergyman and his wife. She was an avid reader, never married and died in 1817, at the age of 41. But in just those few decades, Jane Austen changed the world.
Her novels have had an outsize influence in the centuries since her death. Not only are the books themselves beloved — as sharply observed portraits of British society, revolutionary narrative projects and deliciously satisfying romances — but the stories she created have so permeated culture that people around the world care deeply about Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy, even if they’ve never actually read “Pride and Prejudice.”
With her 250th birthday this year, the Austen Industrial Complex has kicked into high gear with festivals, parades, museum exhibits, concerts and all manner of merch, ranging from the classily apt to the flamboyantly absurd. The words “Jane mania” have been used; so has “exh-Aust-ion.”
How to capture this brief life, and the blazing impact that has spread across the globe in her wake? Without further ado: a mere sampling of the wealth, wonder and weirdness Austen has brought to our lives. After all, your semiquincentennial doesn’t come around every day.
By ‘A Lady’
Austen published just four novels in her lifetime: “Sense and Sensibility” (1811), “Pride and Prejudice” (1813), “Mansfield Park” (1814) and “Emma” (1815). All of them were published anonymously, with the author credited simply as “A Lady.” (If you’re in New York, you can see this first edition for yourself at the Grolier Club through Feb. 14.)
Where the Magic Happened
Placed near a window for light, this diminutive walnut table was, according to family lore, where the author did much of her writing. It is now in the possession of the Jane Austen Society.
An Iconic Accessory
Few of Austen’s personal artifacts remain, contributing to the author’s mystique. One of them is this turquoise ring, which passed to her sister-in-law and then her niece after her death. In 2012, the ring was put up for auction and bought by the “American Idol” champion Kelly Clarkson. This caused quite a stir in England; British officials were loath to let such an important cultural artifact leave the country’s borders. Jane Austen’s House, the museum now based in the writer’s Hampshire home, launched a crowdfunding campaign to Bring the Ring Home and bought the piece from Clarkson. The real ring now lives at the museum; the singer has a replica.
Austen Onscreen
Since 1940, when Austen had a bit of a moment and Greer Garson and Laurence Olivier starred in MGM’s rather liberally reinterpreted “Pride and Prejudice,” there have been more than 20 international adaptations of Austen’s work made for film and TV (to say nothing of radio). From the sublime (Emma Thompson’s Oscar-winning “Sense and Sensibility”) to the ridiculous (the wholly gratuitous 2022 remake of “Persuasion”), the high waists, flickering firelight and double weddings continue to provide an endless stream of debate fodder — and work for a queen’s regiment of British stars.
Jane Goes X-Rated
The rumors are true: XXX Austen is a thing. “Jane Austen Kama Sutra,” “Pride and Promiscuity: The Lost Sex Scenes of Jane Austen” and enough slash fic and amateur porn to fill Bath’s Assembly Rooms are just the start. Purists may never recover.
A Lady Unmasked
Austen’s final two completed novels, “Northanger Abbey” and “Persuasion,” were published after her death. Her brother Henry, who oversaw their publication, took the opportunity to give his sister the recognition he felt she deserved, revealing the true identity of the “Lady” behind “Pride and Prejudice,” “Emma,” etc. in a biographical note. “The following pages are the production of a pen which has already contributed in no small degree to the entertainment of the public,” he wrote, extolling his sister’s imagination, good humor and love of dancing. Still, “no accumulation of fame would have induced her, had she lived, to affix her name to any productions of her pen.”
Wearable Tributes
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Jane Austen fan wants to find other Jane Austen fans, and what better way to advertise your membership in that all-inclusive club than with a bit of merch — from the subtle and classy to the gloriously obscene.
The Austen Literary Universe
On the page, there is no end to the adventures Austen and her characters have been on. There are Jane Austen mysteries, Jane Austen vampire series, Jane Austen fantasy adventures, Jane Austen Y.A. novels and, of course, Jane Austen romances, which transpose her plots to a remote Maine inn, a Greenwich Village penthouse and the Bay Area Indian American community, to name just a few. You can read about Austen-inspired zombie hunters, time-traveling hockey players, Long Island matchmakers and reality TV stars, or imagine further adventures for some of your favorite characters. (Even the obsequious Mr. Collins gets his day in the sun.)
A Botanical Homage
Created in 2017 to mark the 200th anniversary of Austen’s death, the “Jane Austen” rose is characterized by its intense orange color and light, sweet perfume. It is bushy, healthy and easy to grow.
Aunt Jane
Hoping to cement his beloved aunt’s legacy, Austen’s nephew James Edward Austen-Leigh published this biography — a rather rosy portrait based on interviews with family members — five decades after her death. The book is notable not only as the source (biased though it may be) of many of the scant facts we know about her life, but also for the watercolor portrait by James Andrews that serves as its frontispiece. Based on a sketch by Cassandra, this depiction of Jane is softer and far more winsome than the original: Whether that is due to a lack of skill on her sister’s part or overly enthusiastic artistic license on Andrews’s, this is the version of Austen most familiar to people today.
Cultural Currency
In 2017, the Bank of England released a new 10-pound note featuring Andrews’s portrait of Austen, as well as a line from “Pride and Prejudice”: “I declare after all there is no enjoyment like reading!” Austen is the third woman — other than the queen — to be featured on British currency, and the only one currently in circulation.
In the Trenches
During World War I and World War II, British soldiers were given copies of Austen’s works. In his 1924 story “The Janeites,” Rudyard Kipling invoked the grotesque contrasts — and the strange comfort — to be found in escaping to Austen’s well-ordered world amid the horrors of trench warfare. As one character observes, “There’s no one to touch Jane when you’re in a tight place.”
Baby Janes
You’re never too young to learn to love Austen — or that one’s good opinion, once lost, may be lost forever.
The Austen Industrial Complex
Maybe you’ve not so much as seen a Jane Austen meme, let alone read one of her novels. No matter! Need a Jane Austen finger puppet? Lego? Magnetic poetry set? Lingerie? Nameplate necklace? Plush book pillow? License plate frame? Bath bomb? Socks? Dog sweater? Whiskey glass? Tarot deck? Of course you do! And you’re in luck: What a time to be alive.
Around the Globe
Austen’s novels have been translated into more than 40 languages, including Polish, Finnish, Chinese and Farsi. There are active chapters of the Jane Austen Society, her 21st-century fan club, throughout the world.
Playable Persuasions
In Austen’s era, no afternoon tea was complete without a rousing round of whist, a trick-taking card game played in two teams of two. But should you not be up on your Regency amusements, you can find plenty of contemporary puzzles and games with which to fill a few pleasant hours, whether you’re piecing together her most beloved characters or using your cunning and wiles to land your very own Mr. Darcy.
#SoJaneAusten
The wild power of the internet means that many Austen moments have taken on lives of their own, from Colin Firth’s sopping wet shirt and Matthew Macfadyen’s flexing hand to Mr. Collins’s ode to superlative spuds and Mr. Knightley’s dramatic floor flop. The memes are fun, yes, but they also speak to the universality of Austen’s writing: More than two centuries after her books were published, the characters and stories she created are as relatable as ever.
Bonnets Fit for a Bennett
For this summer’s Grand Regency Costumed Promenade in Bath, England — as well as the myriad picnics, balls, house parties, dinners, luncheons, teas and fetes that marked the anniversary — seamstresses, milliners, mantua makers and costume warehouses did a brisk business, attiring the faithful in authentic Regency finery. And that’s a commitment: A bespoke, historically accurate bonnet can easily run to hundreds of dollars.
Most Ardently, Jane
Austen was prolific correspondent, believed to have written thousands of letters in her lifetime, many to her sister, Cassandra. But in an act that has frustrated biographers for centuries, upon Jane’s death, Cassandra protected her sister’s privacy — and reputation? — by burning almost all of them, leaving only about 160 intact, many heavily redacted. But what survives is filled with pithy one-liners. To wit: “I do not want people to be very agreeable, as it saves me the trouble of liking them a great deal.”
Stage and Sensibility
Austen’s works have been adapted numerous times for the stage. Some plays (and musicals) hew closely to the original text, while others — such as Emily Breeze’s comedic riff on “Pride and Prejudice,” “Are the Bennet Girls OK?”, which is running at New York City’s West End Theater through Dec. 21 — use creative license to explore ideas of gender, romance and rage through a contemporary lens.
Austen 101
Austen remains a reliable fount of academic scholarship; recent conference papers have focused on the author’s enduring global reach, the work’s relationship to modern intersectionality, digital humanities and “Jane Austen on the Cheap.” And as one professor told our colleague Sarah Lyall of the Austen amateur scholarship hive, “Woe betide the academic who doesn’t take them seriously.”
W.W.J.D.
When facing problems — of etiquette, romance, domestic or professional turmoil — sometimes the only thing to do is ask: What would Jane do?
-
Entertainment1 week agoHow the Grinch went from a Yuletide bit player to a Christmas A-lister
-
Connecticut1 week agoSnow Accumulation Estimates Increase For CT: Here Are The County-By-County Projections
-
Entertainment1 week agoPat Finn, comedy actor known for roles in ‘The Middle’ and ‘Seinfeld,’ dies at 60
-
World6 days agoHamas builds new terror regime in Gaza, recruiting teens amid problematic election
-
Indianapolis, IN1 week agoIndianapolis Colts playoffs: Updated elimination scenario, AFC standings, playoff picture for Week 17
-
Southeast1 week agoTwo attorneys vanish during Florida fishing trip as ‘heartbroken’ wife pleads for help finding them
-
World1 week agoSnoop Dogg, Lainey Wilson, Huntr/x and Andrea Bocelli Deliver Christmas-Themed Halftime Show for Netflix’s NFL Lions-Vikings Telecast
-
World1 week agoBest of 2025: Top five defining moments in the European Parliament