Author

admin

Browsing

Drilling at the Box deposit continues to demonstrate wide-open mineralization beyond the PEA open-pit

Fortune Bay Corp. (TSXV: FOR,OTC:FTBYF) (FWB: 5QN) (OTCQB: FTBYF) (‘Fortune Bay’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce assay results for the initial three drill holes from the ongoing exploration drilling program at its 100% owned Goldfields Gold Project (‘Goldfields’ or the ‘Project’) in Saskatchewan, one of Canada’s top mining jurisdictions.

The three drill holes were designed to test substantial down-dip gaps in previous drill coverage at the Box deposit (up to 170 m) targeting resource expansion beyond the open-pit limits defined in the Updated Preliminary Economic Assessment (‘Updated PEA’).

The results confirm the continuation of structurally-controlled, higher-grade mineralization at depth.

Assay Highlights:

  • Hole B25-346
    • 2.54 g/t over 17.0 m, including
    • 6.61 g/t over 5.0 m
  • Hole B25-347
    • 6.95 g/t over 2.0 m
    • 3.72 g/t over 3.0 m
    • 4.55 g/t over 3.0 m
    • 2.76 g/t over 7.0 m, including
    • 5.63 g/t over 3.0 m
    • 8.72 g/t over 2.0 m
  • Hole B25-348
    • 2.29 g/t over 9.3 m, including
    • 4.68 g/t over 3.0 m

Gareth Garlick, VP Technical Services, commented, ‘These results add to a growing inventory of strong assays down dip at Box, reinforcing potential for resource growth through additional delineation drilling. Gold mineralization remains wide open down dip at Box, and we are looking forward to additional assays from larger step-out holes that have recently been completed’.

Dale Verran, CEO, added, ‘While PFS-level development is advancing for an open-pit mine at Goldfields, we believe the broader gold resource base has meaningful growth potential through continued expansion and exploration drilling at numerous targets. With nearly all the PEA open-pit resources already classified in the Indicated category, we are uniquely positioned to direct our drill budget toward expansion and discovery rather than resource delineation infill. This provides an opportunity to unlock additional near-mine ounces that could further enhance Goldfields’ already robust economics and strengthen the long-term development profile of the Project.’

Box Deposit – Down-Dip Expansion

As illustrated in Figure 1, the results from B25-346, B25-347 and B25-348 contribute to an expanding dataset of strong down-dip assay intercepts at Box, supporting the potential for delineation of additional mineral resources.

Drill Hole Details and Assay Results

The initial three drill holes at Box were designed to test significant gaps in down-dip drill coverage (up to 170 metres), extending down-dip up to 300 metres beyond the open-pit designed in the Updated PEA. All three holes successfully intersected the mineralized Box Mine Granite (‘BMG’) at or near the depths predicted by the geological model. Observed mineralization characteristics – including quartz vein orientation, thickness, and vein density – are consistent with those documented elsewhere within the deposit.

Higher gold grades at the Box deposit are typically associated with discrete north-south trending structural zones exhibiting increased quartz vein intensity. These higher-grade zones, extending below the Updated PEA open-pit base, present attractive targets for delineation drilling focused on expanding the mineral resources.

The current drilling at Box is oriented towards the east, with dips as shallow as practically achievable (approximately -55° to -60°) to intersect structural zones at the highest angle possible (closest to true thickness) and to maximise the internal coverage of the BMG for each drill hole.

Table 1: Assay results for drill holes B25-346, B25-347 and B25-348.

Hole ID

From (m)

To (m)

Length (m)

Au (g/t)

Collar
Location

Azimuth /

Dip

B25-346

228

245

17.0

2.54

X 640436

Y 6593101

070 / -60

incl.

228

233

5.0

6.61

254

273

19.0

1.42

B25-347

297

312

15.0

1.91

X 640362

Y 6593025

083 / -56

incl.

297

299

2.0

6.95

and

305

308

3.0

3.72

355

374

19.0

1.86

incl.

357

360

3.0

4.55

and

367

374

7.0

2.76

incl.

371

374

3.0

5.63

432

434

2.0

8.72

B25-348

273.68

283

9.3

2.29

X 640309

Y 6592953

085 / -62

incl.

275

278

3.0

4.68

294

298

4.0

1.60

309

319

10.0

1.26

Notes:

1.

Additional assay results for B25-348 are pending (from 448 to 480 metres)

2.

Results shown are assays from 1 metre samples composited into longer intervals with a minimum lower cut-off of 0.5 g/t Au, and maximum 5 metres of consecutive waste defined as < 0.3 g/t Au.

3.

Lengths shown represent core length. True thickness of the mineralized intercepts is expected to be approximately 80% of the core length based on the dominant mineralized quartz vein orientations at Box, however this may vary on an individual sample basis.

4.

Sample locations are provided in NAD83 UTM Zone 12N. Hole azimuths are true north.

2025-2026 Exploration Drilling Program

The assay results from the three drill holes reported herein form part of a broader exploration drilling program initiated in late 2025, comprising approximately 3,250 metres of planned drilling. The program is designed to evaluate opportunities for mineral resource expansion at the Box and Athona deposits, as well as the potential to define new mineral resources at underexplored historical occurrences including Frontier, Golden Pond, and Triangle. All targets are located within two kilometres of past-producing and anticipated future mine infrastructure (Figure 2).

Technical Disclosure & Qualified Person

All drilling is being carried out with NQ diameter. Core trays are transported directly from the drill rig to the Company’s logging facility in Uranium City. Sample intervals are selected for assay based on observations of lithology type, presence of quartz veins and sulphides. These intervals are marked up for continuous sampling with one metre sample increments (adjusted where necessary to not cross lithological boundaries). Core is sawn in half along the core axis for sampling, with the remaining half preserved and stored in the core box. Samples are bagged and placed in plastic pails sealed with security tags for export by air freight to Saskatoon (CA).

All sample processing is being carried out by SRC Geoanalytical Laboratories in Saskatoon using their screened metallics sample process method, which includes; (1) crushing and homogenization of the entire sample; (2) split off a representative 1 kg split for analysis; (3) pulverizing the split with 95 % passing 150 mesh; (3) screening the split at 150 mesh; (4) assay the entire +150 mesh fraction; (5) duplicate assay of two 30 g splits of the -150 mesh fraction; and (6) calculation of the weighted average gold content (in g/t) for the entire sample. All assay is carried out by fire assay with a gravimetric finish.

Certified reference blank and standard material is being used by the Company for independent QAQC of assay results. QAQC samples are inserted into assay sample sequences and results are reviewed to assess for any potential laboratory contamination and to verify assay accuracy and precision. A selected suite of samples will also be sent to another laboratory for additional ‘umpire’ assay testing to further verify the results.

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

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

About Fortune Bay

Fortune Bay Corp. (TSXV:FOR,OTC:FTBYF; FWB:5QN; OTCQB:FTBYF) is a Canadian mineral exploration and development company with assets in Canada and Mexico. The Company’s primary focus is advancing the Goldfields Gold Project in Saskatchewan, Canada. Fortune Bay also holds the Poma Rosa Gold-Copper Project in Chiapas, Mexico, as well as an optioned uranium project portfolio in the Athabasca Basin of Saskatchewan. Fortune Bay continues to evaluate and advance its portfolio in a disciplined manner while maintaining a strong technical foundation and prudent capital management. For more information, please visit www.fortunebaycorp.com or contact info@fortunebaycorp.com.

On behalf of Fortune Bay Corp.

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

Cautionary Statement

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

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

SOURCE Fortune Bay Corp.

View original content to download multimedia: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/March2026/03/c6817.html

News Provided by Canada Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

In 2025, supply disruptions highlighted a growing concern as copper mines in the top copper-producing countries were aging without new mines to replace them.

Additionally, copper demand from electrification is expected to rise significantly in the coming years.

The competing forces of the global macroeconomic situation and a tightening supply and demand situation caused major swings in the copper price last year, and the red metal set a new all-time high in January 2026 as it moved above the US$6 per pound mark on the COMEX for the first time.

Despite a tight supply situation, demand from the energy transition has largely been muted as China, traditionally the largest consumer of copper for its infrastructure, works to stimulate its flagging economy.

The forecast for copper over the next few years is that supply deficits will continue to widen, which in turn should provide more tailwinds for the price of copper and greater upside to company balance sheets.

For investors interested in copper, it’s worth looking at copper production by country. According to the latest US Geological Survey data, global copper production reached 23 million metric tons (MT) in 2025.

Chile again took the crown to become the top copper producing country last year, but some of the others on the list may surprise you. Read on to find out the top 10 copper countries and what mines are driving each country’s copper output.

1. Chile

Copper production: 5.3 million metric tons

In 2025, Chile produced 5.3 million metric tons of copper, making it the world’s largest copper producing country with about 23 percent of the total global copper output. Its copper production dropped 210,000 MT in 2025 compared to its 2024 output. Chile also takes first place for copper reserves with 180 million MT.

Naturally, many of the world’s leading copper miners have substantial operations in Chile, including the state-owned Codelco, Anglo American (LSE:AAL,OTCQX:AAUKF), Glencore (LSE:GLEN,OTC Pink:GLCNF) and Antofagasta (LSE:ANTO,OTC Pink:ANFGF).

Chile is also home to BHP’s (ASX:BHP,NYSE:BHP,LSE:BHP) Escondida, the largest copper mine in the world with an annual output in the 2 million metric ton range. BHP owns a 57.5 percent stake in the operation, with Rio Tinto (ASX:RIO,NYSE:RIO,LSE:RIO) owning 30 percent and Jeco holding the remaining stake.

According to BHP’s 2025 annual report, the company’s portion of Escondida production came in at 1.13 million MT of copper in 2025.

Despite production disruptions at Codelco’s El Teniente, Chile’s copper production is expected to grow to 5.61 million MT in 2026, according to Chile’s copper industry watchdog Cochilco.

2. Democratic Republic of Congo

Copper production: 3.2 million metric tons

In 2025, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) produced 3.2 million metric tons of copper, accounting for nearly 14 percent of global copper output.

The DRC has rapidly increased its copper production in recent years, and its 2025 output marked a continuation of the trend, rising from 2.99 million MT the previous year.

One of the country’s largest copper operations is the Kamoa-Kakula copper complex, a joint venture between Ivanhoe Mines (TSX:IVN,OTCQX:IVPAF) and Zijin Mining Group (HKEX:2899,SHA:601899,OTCPL:ZIJMF). The operation’s Phase 3 expansion commenced commercial production in August 2024.

In 2025, Kamoa-Kakula produced 388,838 MT of copper, a significant decrease from the 437,061 MT produced in 2024. While its copper output was supported by Phase 3, it was impacted by a temporary shutdown of sections of the mine in May 2025 after seismic activity and flooding occurred at the complex. On January 2, 2026, the company announced that it was proceeding to stage 3 dewatering as it works to ramp up production at the affected areas of the mine.

3. Peru

Copper production: 2.7 million metric tons

In 2025, Peru produced 2.7 million metric tons of copper, accounting for just below 12 percent of the world’s copper output. Its total is down a slight 40,000 MT from its copper output in 2024.

Freeport-McMoRan (NYSE:FCX) operates Cerro Verde, the largest copper mine in Peru. In its Q4 2025 report, the company reported that the mine produced 863 million pounds of copper, equivalent to 391,450 MT. This was down from 949 million pounds in 2024.

Other significant copper operations in Peru include Anglo American’s (LSE:AAL,OTCQX:NGLOY) Quellaveco mine and Southern Copper’s (NYSE:SCCO) Tia Maria mine. The majority of copper produced in Peru is shipped to China and Japan, and South Korea and Germany are other top export destinations.

4. China

Copper production: 1.8 million metric tons

In 2025, China mined 1.8 million metric tons of copper, marginally lower than the 1.84 million metric tons produced in 2024. The country’s production hit a peak of 1.94 million MT in 2022.

While the country is fourth place for mine production, when it comes to refined copper production, China is by far the winner. In 2025, China’s refined copper production totaled 14 million metric tons, representing more than 48 percent of global refined copper production and six times the production of the DRC, the second highest refined copper producer.

Zijin Mining Group, a leading metal producer in China, owns a majority stake in the Qulong copper-molybdenum-silver-gold mine in Tibet, the largest copper mine in China.

Zijin reported the Qulong mine produced over 190,000 MT of copper in 2025. Phase 2 started production in January 2026, and is expected to raise its copper output to 300,000 MT in 2026.

5. Russia

Copper production: 1.3 million metric tons

Russia produced 1.3 metric tons of copper in 2025, a sizable increase from the 1.02 million MT produced the previous year.

One of the key contributions to the rise in Russian copper output is the ramp up of Phase 1 production at Udokan Copper’s Udokan mine in Siberia, which entered production in 2023. Phase 1 is expected to produce up to 135,000 MT of copper per year once fully online. This is expected to grow to 450,000 MT if Phase 2 enters production.

Although the copper hydrometallurgical plant at Udokan was delayed by fires in late 2023, copper mining was reported to be unaffected. Udokan pivoted to exporting its copper concentrate instead of refining it domestically, and in a September 2025 release, the company reported it had cumulatively exported 160,000 MT of copper equivalent since the start of production.

6. United States

Copper production: 1 million metric tons

The United States produced 1 million metric tons of copper in 2025. This was down slightly from 1.04 million MT of copper the prior year, and continued a downward trend from the 1.23 million MT the country produced in 2022.

The majority of US copper comes from Arizona, which accounts for 70 percent of domestic supply. Other states with significant copper output include Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada and New Mexico. Overall, 17 mines are responsible for 99 percent of copper production in the United States.

Freeport McMoRan’s Morenci mine in Arizona, a joint venture with Sumitomo (OTC Pink:SSUMF,TSE:8053), is the largest copper mine in the US. According to Freeport’s Q4 2025 report, its combined US operations produced 1.3 billion pounds of copper over the course of the year, equivalent to 591,484 MT.

Other significant operations include Freeport’s Safford and Sierrita mines, at which copper production totaled 249 million MT and 165 million MT respectively.

7. Zambia

Copper production: 940,000 metric tons

In 2025, Zambia produced 940,000 metric tons of copper, up significantly from 823,000 MT in 2024. Production fell to 712,000 MT in 2023 after reaching 840,000 MT in 2021; however, over the last two years, production has rebounded.

There are four major mines that dominate the country’s copper production, including Barrick’s (TSX:ABX,NYSE:B) Lumwana and First Quantum Minerals’ (TSX:FM,OTCPL:FQVLF) Kansanshi.

According to First Quantum’s fourth quarter report, Kansanshi produced 181,183 MT of copper during 2025, up from 170,929 MT the prior year.

Mopani Copper Mines is another major copper producer in the country. While the company was previously owned by a joint venture between Glencore (LSE:GLEN,OTCPL:GLCNF) and First Quantum, the Zambian government, which previously held a 10 percent stake, acquired full ownership in 2021.

8. Australia

Copper production: 730,000 metric tons

In 2025, Australia produced 730,000 metric tons of copper, a slight decrease from the 765,000 MT produced in 2024.

The country’s largest copper operation is BHP’s Olympic Dam mine in South Australia. According to BHP’s annual report, its Australian operations produced 101,900 MT of copper in 2025, down from 106,300 MT in 2024.

The state of Queensland is home to the Mount Isa complex, run by a subsidiary of Glencore. While it was one of Australia’s largest copper producers, the operation was shuttered in July 2025 after a 70 year mine life.

Although it may have modest output compared to those at the top of the list, Australia holds the second highest copper reserves in the world at 100 million metric tons.

9. Indonesia

Copper production: 710,00 metric tons

In 2025, Indonesia produced 710,000 metric tons of copper. While the country’s output had been rising steadily in recent years, it plummeted last year from 1.01 million MT in 2024 due to an accident at the Grasberg copper-gold complex, the country’s largest copper mine.

Grasberg is a 51/48 joint venture between the Indonesian state-owned PT Indonesia Asahan Aluminium and Freeport-McMoRan.

On September 8, 2025, a sudden ingress of wet materials at the mine’s primary Grasberg Block Cave killed seven workers. While Freeport was able to restart operations at unaffected portions of Grasberg during Q4 2025, the mine is unlikely to see full production return until sometime in 2027, with the companies projecting a 600,000 MT loss of contained copper by the end of 2026.

Another of the country’s largest operations is PT Amman Mineral’s (OTCPK:AMMNF,IDX:AMMN) Batu Hijau copper-gold mine. During the first nine months of 2025, the mine produced 145 million pounds of copper in concentrate, equivalent to about 65,770 MT. This marked a 51 percent decline from the same period in 2024 as Amman’s activities transitioned to Phase 8 of the operation. The company set full year 2025 copper guidance at 103,400 MT, and projected a significant increase to 220,000 MT in 2026.

10. Kazakhstan

Copper production: 710,000 metric tons

In 2025, Kazakhstan produced 710,000 metric tons of copper, slightly lower than the 724,000 MT produced in 2024. Still, Kazakhstan’s copper output has climbed substantially in recent years; it produced just 510,000 MT in 2021.

The nation plans to continue that trend, releasing a National Development Plan in February 2024 that aims to increase mineral production by 40 percent by 2029. The plan will involve increased exploration, project co-financing and tax incentives for investment.

Among the country’s largest mining companies is private firm KAZ Minerals, which owns the Aktogay mine. According to the company’s Q3 2025 production report, the mine produced 171,600 MT of copper during the first nine months of the year, in line with the 172,200 MT produced in 2024.

10. Mexico

Copper production: 690,000 metric tons

Rounding out our list of top copper producers, Mexico produced 690,000 metric tons of copper in 2025, a decrease from 2024’s 717,000 MT.

The country’s Sonora state holds Mexico’s two largest copper mines, Buenavista mine and La Caridad. Both mines are owned by Southern Copper (NYSE:SCCO), a subsidiary of Grupo Mexico (OTC Pink:GMBXF,BMV:GMEXICOB).

According to the company’s Q4 2025 report, Buenavista produced 332,710 MT during the year, down from 348,960 MT in 2024.

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

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

The Washington Wizards are seemingly on track to unveil one of their recent prized acquisitions.

In an Instagram post shared Monday, March 2, point guard Trae Young, whom the team acquired in a trade with the Atlanta Hawks, hinted that he would make his Wizards debut Thursday, March 5 against the Utah Jazz. To that end, a person with direct knowledge of the matter confirmed to USA TODAY Sports Monday that Young is trending in that direction and is expected to play that night.

The person spoke under the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly on the matter.

The Instagram post includes a reel of Young going through drills in Wizards gear and includes B-roll footage of Washington D.C. The caption of the post simply reads: “March 5th.’

Young ejected before playing a game for Washington

Three days ahead of his likely debut with Washington, Young was courtside inside Capital One Arena with his teammates as the Wizards hosted the Houston Rockets. And he found a way to get in on the action before playing even a minute with his new team.

Young was ejected in the third quarter after running on the court during a dustup between the two teams that saw multiple technical fouls and the Rockets’ Tari Eason ejected after his defensive foul was reviewed as a flagrant.

Young, like his teammates, was upset about Eason’s conduct on the prior possession. He left the arena to loud cheers from the fans and later posted about the ejection on social media:

‘Don’t expect me to get ejected too many more times D.C. .. but I’m definitely bringing that energy & competitiveness when I’m back for my brothers!’

Wizards reeling from injuries, looking at lottery

Young’s expected first game with Washington comes as the Wizards remain well outside of the play-in picture, at 16-43 and 13th in the Eastern Conference. Washington has lost five consecutive games and 8 of its last 10 – including a 123-118 loss to the Rockets Monday night – while dealing with several key injuries.

Young has been sidelined since late December with knee and quadriceps injuries and has played in only 10 games this season. The Wizards acquired Young in exchange for guards CJ McCollum and Corey Kispert.

Young, 27, is a four-time All-Star who is averaging 19.3 points, 8.9 assists and 1.5 rebounds per game this season. Though he remains one of the top distributors in the NBA — Young led the NBA in assists last season with 11.6 per game — his defense has been a significant issue.

Aside from Young, center Anthony Davis, who was acquired in a separate trade with the Dallas Mavericks, has also been out with a left hand ligament injury and still has not suited up for Washington; Davis is reportedly set to miss the remainder of the 2025-26 season. The Wizards have also been without center Alex Sarr (right hamstring strain) and forward Cam Whitmore (deep vein thrombosis).

Washington is navigating a delicate balance for its first-round draft pick. The selection is Top-8 protected, which means that it will convey to the New York Knicks, if it falls to No. 9 or below. This means that any victories over the final quarter of the season could compromise Washington’s draft positioning; the Wizards currently have the NBA’s fourth-lowest winning percentage (.271).

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news — fastDownload for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

  • Colorado quarterback Dominiq Ponder died in a single-car accident on Sunday, March 1.
  • The team decided to proceed with its scheduled spring practice the following day to honor Ponder’s work ethic.
  • Teammates and coaches described the first practice without him as ‘heavy’ but vowed the tragedy would not tear them apart.

Colorado football players held an emergency team meeting Sunday, March 1, after the death of Colorado quarterback Dominiq Ponder and decided to start spring practice as planned on Monday instead of taking the day off.

But practice was “heavy” and the team is still processing its grief under head coach Deion Sanders.

The team chose to practice as planned because it “exemplifies the type of guy that Dom was,” Colorado running back DeKalon Taylor told reporters in Boulder on Monday after practice. “He always came to work, always had a smile on his face, always wanted to get extra work. Honestly, that was the only thing we could do, really, to give him love.”

Dominiq Ponder’s death: ‘It ain’t gonna tear us apart’

Ponder, 23, died Sunday in a single-car accident in Boulder County at about 3 a.m., according to the Colorado State Patrol. The CSP said he lost control of his Tesla trying to negotiate a right-hand curve before rolling down an embankment, where the car caught fire. Speed was considered a factor in the accident, according to the CSP.

The news shocked the team Sunday as it prepared to open the spring football season with the first of 15 spring practices on Monday.

“It can either mold us or it can tear us apart,” Colorado safety Ben Finneseth told reporters Monday in Boulder. “And it ain’t gonna tear us apart.”

Finneseth also said that Ponder’s death has given the team renewed purpose.

‘Everything that we are going to do moving forward is for him’ he said.

Who was Dominiq Ponder?

Ponder was entering his junior season as a non-scholarship player after serving last year as the team’s fourth-string quarterback. His death especially shook Colorado’s quarterback room, where the quarterbacks meet regularly and where Ponder’s energy was “contagious,” according to Colorado offensive coordinator Brennan Marion.

“We’ll just save spot for him in the room,”Marion said.

Marion said he was proud of his players for practicing Monday “with tears in their eyes.”

“I was just proud of the guys for actually going out there, practicing today and toughing it out,” Marion said.

Taylor said practice was “a little heavy at first.”

“But once coach Marion got the guys going, and we all bought in, we had no other choice but to go hard for him, you know?” Taylor said. “I felt like it was a high-effort practice today. Everybody was at least running around, doing their best effort. And if they did mess up, we messed up full-speed, and that was the only way we could do it.”

Pastor addresses Colorado football team

Pastor Keion Henderson addressed the team by video conference, as shown on Thee Pregame Network, one of Sanders’ favored YouTube channels.

“What happened just don’t make sense,” Henderson told the team. “And the beautiful thing about it is we don’t have to pretend that it does. Grief is real. Shock is real. Questions are real. But so is love. And so is legacy.”

Colorado ends spring practice with an open practice and scrimmage in Boulder on April 11.

“Adversity won’t break us,” Marion said. “It’ll help us break records.”

Sanders is scheduled to address the news media Friday. He offered a prayer on social media Monday.

“Lord help us,” Sanders wrote on social media site X. “Wrap your arms around us & give us the words to speak comfort to one another in this time of need, want & despair for many. We Love u Lord and we Trust you in Jesus name. Amen.”

Follow reporter Brent Schrotenboer @Schrotenboer. Email: bschrotenb@usatoday.com

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

As the calendar turns to March and Selection Sunday looms tantalizingly close, the annual heated discussion around the NCAA men’s basketball tournament bubble has once again commenced.

But for all the debate that surrounds who should be in and out of the 68-team field, dozens of other teams across the country that are safely in will be spending the final two weeks of the 2025-26 regular season jockeying for position on the bracket.

At this pivotal time of year, some teams are hitting their stride and looking poised for a deep tournament run. Others, meanwhile, are watching their once-bright hopes fade with loss after loss.

What teams are surging in March Madness projections? And which ones are starting to stumble?

Here’s a look at the latest list of rising and falling teams for the 2026 NCAA Tournament:

Projected seeds are based on the bracketology update from USA TODAY Sports on Feb. 27

Rising

Florida

Current projected seed: No. 2

The reigning national champions once again look like one of the favorites to cut down the nets with “One Shining Moment” playing in the background. The Gators got off to an inauspicious 5-4 start, but have gone 18-2 since. Their once-struggling backcourt of Xaivian Lee and Boogie Fland is starting to round into form while its frontcourt remains arguably the best in the sport.

UConn

Current projected seed: No. 1

If the Gators aren’t able to gobble up that final No. 1 seed, it will likely be because of another recent national champion. The Huskies haven’t been on quite the same run that Florida has — they’re 5-2 in their past seven games after starting the season 22-1 — but one of their recent wins was as impressive a victory as anyone has had this season: a 72-40 beatdown of St. John’s on Feb. 25.

The win helped solidify UConn’s standing as the fourth No. 1 seed, a status aided in part by a Dec. 9 victory at Madison Square Garden against the Florida team that’s chasing it.

Alabama

Current projected seed: No. 4

One month ago, the Crimson Tide were 14-7, coming off a 23-point loss at Florida and were mired in former G League player Charles Bediako’s contentious eligibility fight. Quite a bit has changed since then. Coach Nate Oats’ team has reeled off eight consecutive victories, including against ranked Tennessee and Arkansas teams, and is up to No. 15 in the NCAA’s NET rankings.

Saint Mary’s

Current projected seed: No. 8

The Gaels are coming off their most emphatic, and certainly sweetest, win of the season, a 70-59 victory on Feb. 28 against then-No. 9 Gonzaga in the final regular-season meeting between the rivals as West Coast Conference members. Saint Mary’s won its final eight-season games and is 18-2 since Dec. 15.

With another win against the Bulldogs in a potential WCC championship matchup, the Gaels could maybe manage avoiding a No. 1 or No. 2 seed in a possible second-round NCAA tournament game.

Virginia

Current projected seed: No. 4

Yes, the Cavaliers are coming off a 26-point humbling at the hands of Duke, but there have been few teams better than them nationally since the calendar flipped to 2026. Since a triple-overtime loss at Virginia Tech on New Year’s Eve, Virginia is 14-2, with wins against NC State (twice), at Louisville and against Miami.

Ryan Odom has engineered one of the more impressive one-year turnarounds in recent memory in the sport. It’s the least he could do after upsetting the No. 1 seed Hoos back in 2018 when he was the coach at UMBC.

Falling

BYU

Current projected seed: No. 6

What was set up to be a magical season for the Cougars with potential No. 1 overall NBA Draft pick AJ Dybantsa has started to unravel in recent weeks. Since starting the season 16-1, BYU is just 4-8 in its past 12 games. While some of that is the unavoidable rigor of a Big 12 schedule, it has also suffered losses against the likes of Oklahoma State and West Virginia, neither of which is projected to make the NCAA tournament. Since Jan. 17, the Cougars are only the No. 60 team nationally, according to Bart Torvik.

A season-ending injury to Richie Saunders on Feb. 14 certainly didn’t help matters, but even before that, BYU was already sliding, with a 2-5 mark in its seven most recent games.

Purdue

Current projected seed: No. 2

A Boilermakers team that was 17-1 and No. 4 in the USA TODAY Sports Coaches Poll just six weeks ago has been decidedly more mortal the past month and change, going 5-6 in its past 11 games. More recently, it has lost three of its past four games, including an 82-74 loss on Sunday at an Ohio State team desperately fighting for its NCAA tournament life.

Purdue still has one of the best players in the sport in guard Braden Smith, but nearing the end of the regular season, the preseason No. 1 team has fallen comfortably short of expectations.

Houston

Current projected seed: No. 2

“Falling” is a relative term when you’re dealing with a program that’s been as dominant as Houston has the past five years, but the Cougars are 1-3 in their past four games after a 23-2 start. That skid included the program’s first three-game losing streak since all the way back in 2017.

Coach Kelvin Sampson’s team ultimately may not be that hurt by the recent slip-ups. Whether it’s as a No. 1 or a No. 2 seed, the Cougars may end up getting to play Sweet 16 and potentially Elite Eight games in Houston.

Texas A&M

Current projected seed: No. 9

Bucky Ball, the intensely fast-paced system implemented by first-year Aggies head coach Bucky McMillan has encountered its share of speed bumps lately. Texas A&M has dropped six of its past eight games after starting the season 17-4, with three of those losses coming by at least 13 points. Thankfully for the Aggies, there’s a chance for a high-profile rebound, with a home game Tuesday against Kentucky.

Louisville

Current projected seed: No. 6

The Cardinals have quietly been one of the more disappointing teams in the sport this season, going just 13-9 since a 7-0 start that vaulted them as high as No. 6 in the USA TODAY Sports Coaches Poll. Some of that could be attributed to an extended injury absence from five-star freshman guard Mikel Brown, who Louisville went 4-4 without, but even with Brown and every other rotation piece, it has lost three of its past four games.

Coach Pat Kelsey’s team is increasingly looking like a squad that will be fortunate to advance past the first week of the tournament, rather than the Final Four or national championship contender it was viewed as in the preseason.

NC State

Current projected seed: No. 7

Will Wade likely has the Wolfpack headed back to the NCAA tournament in his first season at the helm, but they’re currently limping on their way there. NC State has lost four of its past five after an 18-6 start. The losses are bad enough, but the way they’ve come is even more concerning. It was drubbed by 41 at Louisville and 29 at Virginia, and most recently, it lost on the road to a 13-16 Notre Dame team that had lost 12 of its previous 14 games.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Unrivaled hosted its semifinals on Monday at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, New York. The stop reportedly generated $1 million in gate revenue as Vinyl, Phantom, Breeze and Mist competed for a chance to advance to the championship game on Wednesday.

The sold-out crowd of 18,261 included UConn Huskies guard Azzi Fudd and NBA legend Carmelo Anthony. Other celebrities in the crowd included Sabrina Ionescu, Issa Rae, Justin Tuck, Sue Bird, Jason Sudeikis, Wanda Sykes, Kelley O’Hara, Ashton Kutcher and league investor Alex Morgan.

With no WNBA games currently happening and CBA negotiations still in flux, the crowd at Barclays started chanting three words during Monday’s games:

‘Pay the players!’ the people attending said.

The 2026 Unrivaled Playoffs continue at Sephora Arena in Miami on Wednesday, March 4. The championship game is scheduled for at 9:30 p.m. ET on TNT, truTV and HBO Max.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Dallas Wings guard Paige Bueckers shared her thoughts on the WNBA’s ongoing CBA negotiations.

‘At this point, it’s not really a negotiation anymore. Both sides aren’t moving,’ Bueckers said. ‘So, I feel like we need to continue to have these conversations, continue to actually have change implemented for us to move on our stance.’

‘We as players, we don’t want a strike. We wanna have a season. I love playing basketball. That’s all I wanna do. But, again, there’s things that need to be handled, and we wanna do it as professionals.

On Monday, a source confirmed to USA TODAY that the WNBA submitted a counterproposal to the players’ union on March 1. The proposal was in response to the WNBPA’s Feb. 27 submission.

In Sunday’s proposal, the league offered to make first- and second-team All-WNBA players on rookie contracts eligible to sign a maximum contract in their fourth year. Those players would not be eligible for a core designation following that extension. A player on a rookie scale contract that earns MVP could similarly be eligible for a supermax deal.

The WNBA’s latest offer also increased the Year 1 salary cap to $5.75 million, up from $1.5 million in 2025. Based on conservative league projections, the salary cap would grow to roughly $8.5 million by 2031, the final year of the CBA.

The WNBA’s proposal also comes as WNBPA vice president and Los Angeles Sparks guard Kelsey Plum viewed the league’s offer so far as a ‘significant win.’

‘I want to play, and players want to play,’ Plum said.

‘And so obviously we’re going to continue to negotiate and do everything we possibly can to get this done in a timely fashion. But obviously a strike would be the worst thing for both sides, because we are in a [revenue sharing system], so no revenue, no revenue to share.’

This post appeared first on USA TODAY