US stocks dip after careening through a manic day following Trump’s latest tariff threat

US stocks dip after careening through a manic day following Trump’s latest tariff threat

By STAN CHOE, ELAINE KURTENBACH and DAVID McHUGH AP Business Writers

NEW YORK (AP) — U.S. stocks careened through a manic Monday after President Donald Trump threatened to crank his tariffs higher, despite a stunning display showing how dearly Wall Street wants him to do the opposite.

The S&P 500 slipped 0.2% at the end of a day full of heart-racing reversals as battered financial markets try to figure out what Trump’s ultimate goal is for his trade war. If it’s to get other countries to agree to trade deals, he could lower his tariffs and avoid a possible recession. But if it’s to remake the economy and stick with tariffs for the long haul, stock prices may need to fall further.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 349 points, or 0.9%, and the Nasdaq composite edged up by 0.1%.

All three indexes started the day sharply lower, and the Dow plunged as many as 1,700 points following even worse losses elsewhere in the world. But it suddenly surged to a gain of nearly 900 points in the late morning. The S&P 500, meanwhile, went from a loss of 4.7% to a leap of 3.4%, which would have been its biggest jump in years.

The sudden rise followed a false rumor that Trump was considering a 90-day pause on his tariffs, one that a White House account on X quickly labeled as “fake news.” That a rumor could move trillions of dollars’ worth of investments shows how much investors are hoping to see signs that Trump may let up on tariffs.

Stocks quickly turned back down, and shortly afterward, Trump dug in further and said he may raise tariffs more against China after the world’s second-largest economy retaliated last week with its own set of tariffs on U.S. products.

It’s a slap in the face to Wall Street because it suggests Trump may not care how much pain he inflicts on the market. Many professional investors had long thought that a president who used to crow about records reached under his watch would pull back on policies if they sent the Dow reeling.

On Sunday Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that he wasn’t concerned about a sell-off and that “sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something.”

Trump has given several reasons for his stiff tariffs, including to bring manufacturing jobs back to the United States, which is a process that could take years. Trump on Sunday said he wanted to bring down the numbers for how much more the United States imports from other countries versus how much it sends to them.

Indexes nevertheless did keep swinging between losses and gains Monday after Trump’s latest tariff threat, in part because hope still remains in markets that negotiations may still come.

“We’re not calling the all-clear at all, but when you have this type of volatility in the market, of course you’re going to have back and forth” in markets not just day to day but also hour to hour, said Nate Thooft, a senior portfolio manager at Manulife Investment Management.

“We’re all waiting for the next bit of information,” he said. “Literally a Truth Social tweet or an announcement of some sort about real negotiations could dramatically move this market. This is the world we live in right now.”

All that seemed certain Monday was the financial pain hammering investments around the world for a third day after Trump announced tariffs in his “Liberation Day.”

Stocks in Hong Kong plunged 13.2% for their worst day since 1997. A barrel of benchmark U.S. crude oil dipped below $60 during the morning for the first time since 2021, hurt by worries that a global economy weakened by trade barriers will burn less fuel. Bitcoin sank below $79,000, down from its record above $100,000 set in January, after holding steadier than other markets last week.

Trump’s tariffs are an attack on the globalization that’s remade the world’s economy, which helped bring down prices for products on the shelves of U.S. stores but also caused production jobs to leave for other countries.

It also adds pressure on the Federal Reserve. Investors have become nearly conditioned to expect the central bank to swoop in as a hero by slashing interest rates to protect the economy during every downturn. But the Fed may have less freedom to act this time around because inflation remains higher than the Fed would like. And while lower interest rates can goose the economy, they can also put upward pressure on inflation.

“The recent tariffs will likely increase inflation and are causing many to consider a greater probability of a recession,” JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the most influential executives on Wall Street, wrote in his annual letter to shareholders Monday. “Whether or not the menu of tariffs causes a recession remains in question, but it will slow down growth.”

In the bond market, Treasury yields rallied to recover some of their sharp drops from earlier weeks. Some of the big move may have been because of reduced expectations for cuts to interest rates by the Fed. Some analysts also said it could be due to investors outside of the United States wanting to pare their U.S. investments.

The yield on the 10-year Treasury jumped to 4.20% from 4.01% late Friday.

Earlier in the day, the S&P 500 briefly fell more than 20% below its record set less than two months ago. If it finishes a day below that bar, it would be a big enough drop that Wall Street has a name for it. A “bear market” signifies a downturn that’s moved beyond a run-of-the-mill 10% drop, which happens every year or so, and has graduated into something more vicious.

The S&P 500, which sits at the heart of many investors’ 401(k) accounts, is coming off its worst week since COVID began crashing the global economy in March 2020.

All told, the index fell 11.83 points Monday to 5,062.25. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 349.26 to 37,965.60, and the Nasdaq composite added 15.48 to 15,603.26.

___

Kurtenbach reported from Bangkok. McHugh reported from Frankfurt, Germany. Associated Press writers Ayaka McGill, Paul Harloff, Matt Ott and Jiang Junzhe also contributed.

Hearing begins for $2.8 billion NCAA settlement, could lock in seismic changes for college sports

Hearing begins for $2.8 billion NCAA settlement, could lock in seismic changes for college sports

By EDDIE PELLS and JANIE McCAULEY Associated Press

OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — A federal judge opened the final hearing for a landmark $2.8 billion settlement that will impact every corner of college athletics by saying she will not be granting formal approval on Monday.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken said she would hear from attorneys and some of those objecting to the plan before adjourning.

“I’m not going to rule from the bench,” Wilken said at the start of the hearing.

In addition to comments from attorneys, testimony was expected from critics of the sprawling plan that was hashed out last year by attorneys representing the NCAA and other defendants and those representing thousands of current and former athletes. LSU gymnast and influencer Olivia Dunne was among the 18 people scheduled to testify, though she was expected to appear via Zoom.

Wilken already has granted preliminary approval of the settlement involving the NCAA and the nation’s five largest conferences. The changes would begin July 1, clearing the way for each school to share up to $20.5 million each with their athletes.

Universities across the country have been busy making plans, under the assumption Wilken will put the terms into effect.

“We’re going to have a plan going into July 1, then we’re probably going to spend the next year figuring out how good that plan is and how we need to modify it going forward,” said Florida athletic director Scott Stricklin, whose department is among the biggest in the country and includes a Gators men’s basketball team playing for the national title Monday night against Houston.

The so-called House settlement, named after Arizona State swimmer Grant House, actually decides three similar lawsuits that were bundled into one. The defendants are the NCAA and the Southeastern, Big Ten, Atlantic Coast, Big 12 and Pac-12 conferences, all of whom have been touting the settlement as the best path forward for their industry.

“It’s a huge step forward for college sports, especially at the highest level,” said NCAA President Charlie Baker, whose organization continues to seek antitrust protections from Congress. “My biggest problem with the way the whole thing works right now is the schools have been removed from the primary relationship with the student-athletes.”

The most ground-shifting part of the settlement calls on schools from the biggest conferences to pay some 22% of their revenue from media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships — which equals about $20.5 million in the first year — directly to athletes for use of their name, images and likeness (NIL).

Still allowed would be NIL payments to athletes from outside sources, which is what triggered the seismic shift that college sports has endured over the last four years. For instance, Cooper Flagg of Duke reportedly makes $4.8 million in NIL deals from groups affiliated with the school and others.

The settlement calls for a “clearinghouse” to make sure any NIL deal worth more than $600 is pegged at “fair market value.” It’s an attempt to prevent straight “pay for play” deals, though many critics believe the entire new structure is simply NIL masquerading as that.

Another key element is the $2.8 billion in back damages to athletes who played sports between 2016 and 2024 and were not entitled to the full benefits of NIL at the time they attended schools. Those payments are being calculated by a formula that will favor football and basketball players and will be doled out by the NCAA and the conferences.

The settlement also calls for replacing scholarship limits with roster limits. The effect would be to allow every athlete to be eligible for a scholarship while cutting the number of spots available.

There will be winners and losers under such a formula, though some fear it could signal the end of the walk-on athlete in college sports and also imperil smaller sports programs that train and populate the U.S. Olympic team.

___

AP College Football Writer Eric Olson contributed. Pells reported from San Antonio.

Trump says he’s not backing down on tariffs, calls them ‘medicine’ as markets reel

Trump says he’s not backing down on tariffs, calls them ‘medicine’ as markets reel

By ADRIANA GOMEZ LICON and FATIMA HUSSEIN Associated Press

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — President Donald Trump said Sunday that he won’t back down on his sweeping tariffs on imports from most of the world unless countries even out their trade with the U.S., digging in on his plans to implement the taxes that have sent financial markets reeling, raised fears of a recession and upended the global trading system.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said he didn’t want global markets to fall, but also that he wasn’t concerned about the massive sell-off either, adding, “sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something.”

His comments came as global financial markets appeared on track to continue sharp declines once trading resumes Monday, and after Trump’s aides sought to soothe market concerns by saying more than 50 nations had reached out about launching negotiations to lift the tariffs.

President Donald Trump said Sunday that he won’t back down on his sweeping tariffs on imports from most of the world unless countries even out their trade with the U.S., digging in on his plans to implement the taxes that have sent financial markets reeling. (AP Video)

“I spoke to a lot of leaders, European, Asian, from all over the world,” Trump said. “They’re dying to make a deal. And I said, we’re not going to have deficits with your country. We’re not going to do that, because to me a deficit is a loss. We’re going to have surpluses or at worst, going to be breaking even.”

The higher rates are set to be collected beginning Wednesday, ushering in a new era of economic uncertainty with no clear end in sight. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said unfair trade practices are not “the kind of thing you can negotiate away in days or weeks.” The United States, he said, must see “what the countries offer and whether it’s believable.”

Trump, who spent the weekend in Florida playing golf, posted online that “WE WILL WIN. HANG TOUGH, it won’t be easy.” His Cabinet members and economic advisers were out in force Sunday defending the tariffs and downplaying the consequences for the global economy.

“There doesn’t have to be a recession. Who knows how the market is going to react in a day, in a week?” Bessent said. “What we are looking at is building the long-term economic fundamentals for prosperity.”

U.S. stock futures dropped on Sunday night as the tariffs continued to roil the markets. S&P 500 futures were down 2.5% while that for the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 2.1%. Nasdaq futures were down 3.1%. Even the price of bitcoin, which held relatively stable last week, fell nearly 6% Sunday.

Asian shares, meanwhile, nosedived. Tokyo’s Nikkei 225 index lost nearly 8% shortly after the market opened. By midday, it was down 6%. A circuit breaker briefly suspended trading of Topix futures after an earlier sharp fall in U.S. futures. Chinese markets also tumbled, with Hong Kong’s Hang Seng dropping 9.4%, while the Shanghai Composite index lost 6.2%.

Trump’s tariff blitz, announced April 2, fulfilled a key campaign promise as he acted without Congress to redraw the rules of global trade. It was a move decades in the making for Trump, who has long denounced foreign trade deals as unfair to the U.S. He is gambling that voters will be willing to endure higher prices for everyday items to enact his economic vision.

Countries are scrambling to figure out how to respond to the tariffs, with China and others retaliating quickly.

Top White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett acknowledged that other countries are “angry and retaliating,” and, he said, “by the way, coming to the table.” He cited the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative as reporting that more than 50 nations had reached out to the White House to begin talks.

Adding to the turmoil, the new tariffs are hitting American allies and adversaries alike, including Israel, which is facing a 17% tariff. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to visit the White House and speak at a press conference with Trump on Monday, with his office saying the tariffs would be a point of discussion with Trump along with the war in Gaza and other issues.

Another American ally, Vietnam, a major manufacturing center for clothing, has also been in touch with the administration about the tariffs. Trump said Vietnam’s leader said in a telephone call that his country “wants to cut their Tariffs down to ZERO if they are able to make an agreement with the U.S.” And a key European partner, Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni, said she disagreed with Trump’s move but was “ready to deploy all the tools — negotiating and economic — necessary to support our businesses and our sectors that may be penalized.”

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick made clear there was no postponing tariffs that are days away.

“The tariffs are coming. Of course they are,” he said, adding that Trump needed to reset global trade. But he committed only to having them “definitely” remain “for days and weeks.”

In Congress, where Trump’s Republican Party has long championed free trade, the tariff regiment has been met with applause but also significant unease.

Several Republican senators have already signed onto a new bipartisan bill that would require presidents to justify new tariffs to Congress. Lawmakers would then have to approve the tariffs within 60 days, or they would expire. Nebraska GOP Rep. Don Bacon said Sunday that he would introduce a House version of the bill, saying that Congress needs to restores its powers over tariffs.

“We gave some of that power to the executive branch. I think, in hindsight, that was a mistake,” said Bacon, adding that getting a measure passed would be challenging unless the financial markets continue to react negatively and other indicators such as inflation and unemployment shift.

Wyoming’s John Barrasso, the No. 2 member of the Senate’s GOP leadership, said Trump is “doing what he has every right to do.” But, he acknowledged, “there is concern, and there’s concern across the country. People are watching the markets.”

“There’ll be a discussion in the Senate,” Barrasso said of the tariffs. “We’ll see which way the discussion goes.”

Trump’s government cost-cutting guru, billionaire businessman Elon Musk, had been relatively silent on Trump’s tariffs, but said at a weekend event in Italy that he would like to see the U.S. and Europe move to “a zero-tariff situation.” The comment from the Tesla owner who leads Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency drew a rebuke from White House trade adviser Peter Navarro.

“Elon, when he is on his DOGE lane, is great. But we understand what’s going on here. We just have to understand. Elon sells cars,” Navarro said. He added: “He’s simply protecting his own interest as any business person would do.”

Trump indicated he disagreed with Musk, saying Sunday of the European Union, “They want to talk, but there’s no talk unless they pay us a lot of money on a yearly basis.”

Lawrence Summers, an economist who was treasury secretary under Democratic President Bill Clinton, said Trump and his economic team are sending contradictory messages if they say they are interested in reviving manufacturing while still being open to negotiating with trade partners.

If other countries eliminate their tariffs, and the U.S, does, too, he said, “it’s just making a deal, then we don’t raise any revenue nor do we get any businesses to relocate to the United States. If it’s a permanent revenue source and trying to get businesses to relocate to the United States, then we’re going to have these tariffs permanently. So the president can’t have it both ways.”

Bessent was on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Hassett and Summers appeared on ABC’s “This Week,” Lutnick and Barrasso were on CBS’ “Face the Nation” and Navarro was interviewed on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures.”

___

Gomez Licon reported from Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Associated Press writer Giada Zampano in Rome contributed to this report.

Clams Casino

Clams Casino

Clams Casino

Photo by Getty Images

Clams Casino Recipe from Serious Eats

Prep time: 45 minutes

Cooking time: 40 minutes

Serving size: 6-8 servings

Ingredients

For the Bacon Breadcrumbs

  • 6 ounces bacon, finely diced
  • 1 cup panko breadcrumbs
  • Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper

For the Clams

  • 2 ounces bacon, finely diced
  • 3 large shallots, minced (about 1 cup)
  • 3 medium cloves garlic, minced
  • Pinch red pepper flakes
  • 1/4 cup dry white wine
  • 24 littleneck clams, purged and scrubbed (see note)
  • 1/2 cup minced flat-leaf parsley, divided
  • 2 sticks (8 ounces) unsalted butter, softened
  • Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper
  • Lemon wedges, for serving

Directions

  1. For the Bacon Bread Crumbs: In a large skillet, cook 6 ounces diced bacon over medium-high heat, stirring, until fat has rendered and bacon is browned and crisp, about 7 minutes. Lower heat if skillet gets too hot and begins to smoke.
  2. Stir in panko bread crumbs to evenly coat in bacon fat and cook, stirring and tossing, until bread crumbs are lightly toasted, about 3 minutes. Transfer to a bowl to cool. Season very lightly with salt and pepper.
  3. For the Clams: In a large sauté pan, cook 2 ounces diced bacon over medium-high heat until fat has rendered and bacon is lightly browned and crisp, about 3 minutes. Stir in shallots, garlic, and red pepper flakes and cook, stirring, until shallots have softened, about 4 minutes.
  4. Add white wine and clams, cover, and cook, checking occasionally, until the clams begin to open. Using tongs, transfer opened clams to a large bowl to cool, continuing to cover sauté pan and checking frequently for newly opened clams. Continue until last clams have opened. (Some may open only a crack; this is fine, just pry the shell fully open. Discard clams that have a foul odor or are filled with mud.)
  5. Uncover sauté pan and cook, stirring, until wine and clam liquid have evaporated and the shallot-bacon mixture has become jammy. Remove from heat and allow to cool.
  6. In a medium bowl, stir shallot-bacon mixture and 1/4 cup parsley into softened butter until thoroughly incorporated. Season lightly with salt and pepper. (Clams can be salty, so be careful not to over-season.)
  7. Working one at a time, pry off top shell of each clam and discard, making sure no shell fragments from the hinge fall into the clam. Free each clam from the bottom shell, then set back in the bottom shell and transfer to a rimmed baking sheet.
  8. Using a butter knife, pack clam butter all around and over each clam, sealing each into the bottom shell. Sprinkle a small amount of bacon bread crumbs on top of each clam, pressing lightly to adhere. At this point, you can cover the baking sheet with plastic and refrigerate clams for up to 1 day before cooking. (You will have clam butter left over; keep it refrigerated in a sealed container for up to 1 week. It’s delicious tossed with spaghetti for an easy weeknight meal.)
  9. When ready to serve, place clams in a 450°F oven and cook until butter is melted and clams are fully heated through, 3 to 5 minutes. Stir remaining 1/4 cup parsley into bread crumbs, then sprinkle a generous amount on top of each clam. Return to oven for 1 minute to warm bread crumbs, then serve right away with lemon wedges.
The skyrocketing cost of weight-loss drugs has state Medicaid programs looking for a solution

The skyrocketing cost of weight-loss drugs has state Medicaid programs looking for a solution

By SUSAN HAIGH and MARC LEVY Associated Press

States increasingly struggling to cover the rising cost of popular GLP-1 drugs like Wegovy, Ozempic and Zepbound are searching for ways to get out from under the budgetary squeeze that took them by surprise.

One solution some policymakers may try is restricting the number of people on Medicaid who can use the pricey diabetes drugs for weight-loss purposes.

Pennsylvania’s Medicaid coverage of the drugs is expected to cost $1.3 billion in 2025 — up from a fraction of that several years ago — and is contributing to projections of a multibillion-dollar budget deficit. The state is thinking about requiring Medicaid patients who want to use GLP-1s for weight loss to meet a certain number on the body-mass index or try diet and exercise programs or less expensive medications first.

“It is a medication that’s gotten a lot of hype and a lot of press, and has become very popular in its use and it is wildly expensive,” Dr. Val Arkoosh, Pennsylvania’s human services secretary, told a state House hearing in March.

At least 14 states already cover the cost of GLP-1 medications for obesity treatment for patients on Medicaid, the federal health care program for people with low incomes. Democrats and Republicans in at least a half-dozen other states floated bills this year to require the same coverage, according to an Associated Press analysis using the bill-tracking software Plural.

Some bills have stalled while others remain alive, including a proposal in Arkansas requiring GLP-1s to be covered under Medicaid when prescribed specifically for weight loss. Iowa lawmakers are thinking about ordering a cost-benefit analysis before making the commitment. Already, West Virginia and North Carolina ended programs in 2024 that provided coverage for state employees, citing cost concerns.

“It is very expensive,” said Jeffrey Beckham, the state budget director in Connecticut, where Medicaid coverage of the drugs for weight loss may be scrapped entirely. “Other states are coming to that conclusion, as well as some private carriers.”

Overall Medicaid spending on GLP-1 drugs — before partial rebates from drug manufacturers — jumped from $577.3 million in 2019 to $3.9 billion in 2023, according to a November report from KFF, a nonprofit that researches health care issues. The number of prescriptions for the drugs increased by more than 400% during that same time period. The average annual cost per patient for a GLP-1 drug is $12,000, according to a Peterson-KFF tracker.

About half of Americans “strongly” or “somewhat” favor having Medicare and Medicaid cover weight-loss drugs for people who have obesity, a recent AP-NORC poll showed, with about 2 in 10 opposed the idea and about one-quarter with a neutral view.

But Medicare does not cover GLP-1s, and the Trump administration said Friday that wouldn’t put into place a proposed rule by presidential predecessor Joe Biden to cover the medications under Medicare’s Part D prescription drug coverage. Biden’s proposal was expensive: It would have included coverage for all state- and federally funded Medicaid programs, costing taxpayers as much as $35 billion over next decade.

States that do provide coverage have tried to manage costs by putting prescribing limits on the GLP-1s. There’s also some evidence that if Medicaid patients lose weight with the drugs, they’ll be healthier and less expensive to cover, said Tracy Zvenyach of Obesity Action, an advocacy group that urges states to provide coverage.

Zvenyach also stressed how it’s unclear whether patients will need to regularly take these drugs for the rest of their lives — a key cost concern raised by public officials. “Someone may have to be on treatment for over the course of their lifetime,” she said. “But we don’t know exactly what that regimen would look like.”

About 40% of adults in the U.S. have obesity, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Obesity can cause hypertension, Type 2 diabetes and high cholesterol, which lead to greater risks of things like stroke and heart attacks.

Dr. Adam Raphael Rom, a physician at Greater Philadelphia Health Action, a network of health centers in the city, said most of his patients who take GLP-1s are covered by Medicaid and some are non-diabetics who use it for weight loss.

“I had one patient tell me that it’s like, changed her relationship to food,” Rom said. “I’ve had patients lose like 20, 40, 60 pounds.”

But obesity experts have told The Associated Press that as many as 1 in 5 people may not lose the amount of weight that others have seen come off. And in a recent survey of state Medicaid directors conducted by KFF, a health policy research organization, they said cost and potential side effects are among their concerns.

The debate over coverage coincides with rising Medicaid budgets and the prospect of losing federal funding — with congressional Republicans considering siphoning as much as $880 billion from Medicaid over the next decade.

Connecticut is facing a $290 million Medicaid account deficit, and Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont proposed doing away with a 2023 requirement that Medicaid cover GLP-1s for severe obesity, though the state has never fully abided by the law due to the cost.

Starting June 14, though, state Medicaid patients will be required to have a Type 2 diabetes diagnosis to get the drugs covered. Lamont also is pushing for the state to cover two less expensive oral medications approved by the FDA for weight loss, as well as nutrition counseling.

Sarah Makowicki, 42, tried the other medications and said she suffered serious side effects. The graduate student and statehouse intern is working on a bill that would restore the full GLP-1 coverage for her and others.

Sara Lamontagne, a transgender woman with a disability who is on Medicaid, said she regained weight when her coverage for GLP-1 medication was cut off in the past. She said she went from 260 pounds to over 300, heavier than she had ever been.

“So, it’s a horrible game to be played, to be going back and and forth,” said Lamontagne, whose attempts to appeal the state’s recent denial of her Ozempic prescription refill have been unsuccessful.

Makowicki said GLP-1 drugs combined with weight-loss surgery helped her change her life: She’s had knee-replacement surgery and lost over 200 pounds.

“I am a different person from what I was five years ago,” Makowicki said. “Not only in my physical space, but also mentally.”

Final Four games average 15.3 million viewers, its biggest audience in 8 years

Final Four games average 15.3 million viewers, its biggest audience in 8 years

NEW YORK (AP) — Saturday night’s Final Four games averaged 15.3 million viewers on CBS according to fast national numbers from Nielsen, the most-watched national semifinals in eight years.

The data also includes some out-of-home data. Numbers are expected to increase when the final numbers are released Tuesday morning.

Some of the increase can be attributed to changes in the way viewers are counted. This is the first year Nielsen is measuring out-of-home viewers for all states but Hawaii and Alaska.

It was previously the top 44 media markets, which covered 65% of the country.

The ratings also include Nielsen data from smart TVs along with cable and satellite set-top boxes.

Another reason for the increase over last year is that the Final Four alternates between CBS and TBS, TNT and truTV. CBS has Final Four in odd-numbered years while it is on cable in even-numbered years.

Houston’s 70-67 victory over Duke in the second game averaged 16 million viewers, making it the most-watched game of this year’s March Madness.

Florida’s 79-73 win over Auburn averaged 14.6 million.

The tournament through Saturday is averaging 9.9 million viewers on CBS, TBS, TNT and truTV. That is a 2% increase from 2024.

Duke’s push for 6th NCAA title falls apart in unlikely late collapse against Houston in Final Four

Duke’s push for 6th NCAA title falls apart in unlikely late collapse against Houston in Final Four

By AARON BEARD AP Basketball Writer

SAN ANTONIO (AP) — Up by double figures in the second half at the Final Four, closing in on the chance to play for yet another national championship, Duke was right where it had worked all season to be.

What happened next was unforgettable, history of the most painful kind.

Up 14 with 8 1/2 minutes left, the Blue Devils improbably faded down the stretch, done in by Houston’s relentless fight to stay in a game that had frequently seemed on the verge of getting away. There were missed shots and miscues. An inability to get stops. And even their reliable star — Associated Press national player of the year Cooper Flagg — couldn’t save the Blue Devils on a contested late shot when they suddenly faced a late deficit.

By the final horn, the Cougars had scored the game’s last nine points in the last 33 seconds for a 70-67 victory Saturday night in the second semifinal.

“It’s heartbreaking, it’s incredibly disappointing,” third-year coach Jon Scheyer said. “There’s a lot of pain that comes with this. That’s what the tournament is all about.”

It was as abrupt as it was shocking, the final horn triggering a sound that can only be described as jubilation crashing into disbelief running throughout the Alamodome. The push for the Blue Devils’ sixth NCAA title was over, along with the first Final Four trip of Scheyer’s brief tenure in what was beginning to feel like a coronating moment after taking over for retired Hall of Famer Mike Krzyzewski.

“It was an incredible season,” Flagg said, fighting back tears after a 27-point showing. “Incredible people, incredible relationships that I’m going to have for the rest of my life. Didn’t end the way we wanted it to, but still an incredible year.”

Duke (35-4) went from being in firm control all night to having a desperate final possession after LJ Cryer’s last two free throws with 3.7 seconds left, leaving the Blue Devils only Sion James’ full-court heave for a try at a tying 3 with no timeouts left. But after a deflection-forced scramble, the ball ended up in Tyrese Proctor’s hands with time only for Proctor to turn and flail it toward the basket.

The ball missed everything as the horn sounded.

That sent James crumpling to midcourt in anguish, only to look around and realize he had to quickly spring up because the Cougars’ bench was sprinting his way to celebrate a stunning victory. J’Wan Roberts, Houston’s burly 23-year-old forward playing in his fifth season, went running over to Cougars fans near the edge of the court to scream in triumphant joy while popping the front of his jersey.

As Houston’s players celebrated, the 18-year-old Flagg walked with his head down toward the edge of the elevated court for the stairs to down to the tunnel and to the locker room. His teammates followed with stunned expressions, along with freshman big man Khaman Maluach having tears streaming down his face.

Worse, the path for the Blue Devils to their locker-room sanctuary was through the heaviest concentration of Houston fans in the arena. So Duke made its way off amid a sea of red-clad fans tauntingly waving goodbye and capturing the moment with their phones.

It didn’t seem likely that the only team to rank inside KenPom’s top five for adjusted offensive and defensive efficiency would find itself in that position. But there were hiccups, small mistakes that seemingly compounded against a tough team that absolutely refused to back down.

The sequence that stood out was Proctor missing the front end of a 1-and-1 free throw with Duke up just one, then Flagg fouling Roberts while trying to reach over his box out. Roberts, who came into the game shooting 62.5%, calmly made both with 19.6 seconds left for a 68-67 lead.

Then, after a timeout, Flagg got the ball with a chance to attack Roberts. The versatile 6-foot-9 forward widely projected to become the No. 1 overall NBA pick drove the left side, then turned for a fading shot in the lane over Roberts’ outstretched hand.

The shot was short, the ball bouncing off the front of the rim and landing with the Cougars to set up Cryer’s last free throws to cap his own huge night (26 points).

“Trust Cooper 100 times out of 100 times,” James said. “I had a chance to get the offensive rebound and didn’t get there in time.”

But it was far more than just a shot, something Flagg alluded to in the postgame news conference. It was a not-precise handling of a defensive switch between Flagg and James that gave Emanuel Sharp enough space to bury a 3-pointer that brought Houston within 67-64 with 32.4 seconds left.

Or the ensuing inbounds pass, when James tried to lob it to Flagg against a 6-2 defender Mylik Wilson against the Cougars’ fullcourt pressure. But Wilson deflected the ball to create the turnover, and Joseph Tugler’s flying-in dunk off a miss quickly closed the gap to 67-66.

And the seeds were planted even earlier than that, notably with Duke leading 59-45 with 8:17 left and a chance to strengthen its grasp on the game. But Houston instead ran off 10 straight points, fittingly starting with a 3-pointer from Cryer, that changed the trajectory of the final minutes.

That’s why Scheyer seemed more bothered by his team’s defensive play — the Cougars had 42 second-half points and 13 of their 19 second-chance points after the break — than Duke’s offense sputtering to nine points and one basket in the final 10 minutes.

And just like that, what looked like a title march had become a time of painful reflection — with months more of it to come.

“Obviously as a coach, I’m reflecting right now what else I could’ve said or done to help our guys at the end there,” Scheyer said. “That’s the thing that kills me the most.”

Buttermilk Icing

Buttermilk Icing

Buttermilk Icing Recipe

Cakes cooling with Buttermilk Icing on top.
Photo by Getty Images

Buttermilk icing recipe originally published in WPTF’s “Ask Your Neighbor” Cookbook.

Prep time: 5-10 minutes

Cooking time: 5-10 minutes

Serving size: Icing for one cake

Ingredients

  • 1 cup buttermilk
  • 1 tsp butter
  • 1 tsp baking soda
  • 1 tbsp corn syrup
  • 1 3/4 cups sugar
Sugar being poured into water boiling on the stove to make buttermilk icing.
Photo by Getty Images

Directions

  1. Combine the buttermilk, butter, baking soda, corn syrup, and sugar in a pot.
  2. Stir the mixture constantly over medium heat until it comes to a good boil.
  3. Once the icing has boiled, remove it from the heat.
  4. Pour the icing over the cake while the cake is still hot, allowing the icing to soak in and set.
  5. Serve and enjoy!
Cake cooling down with buttermilk icing hardening.
Photo by Getty Images
Homemade Marshmallow Peeps

Homemade Marshmallow Peeps

Homemade Marshmallow Peeps

Photo by Getty Images

Homemade Marshmallow Peeps Recipe from Southern Fatty

Prep time: 15 minutes

Cooking time: 15 minutes

Serving size: 15-20 servings

Ingredients

For the Colored Sugar

  • 1 cup sugar for each color, in Ziplock bag
  • food coloring, any type

For the Peeps

  • 1 packet gelatin
  • ⅓ cup water
  • 1 cup sugar
  • ¼ cup water
  • 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
  • cocoa powder + tiny bit of water, optional – for eyes
Sugar being poured into water boiling on the stove to make buttermilk icing.
Photo by Getty Images

Directions

For the Colored Sugar

  1. Combine 1 cup sugar in Ziplock bag with coloring.
  2. Mix until well combined, several minutes.
  3. Sift larger pieces out.

For the Peeps

  1. In mixer bowl, put ⅓ cup cold water.
  2. Empty packet of gelatin over water and let sit while you make sugar mixture.
  3. In saucepan, combine 1 cup sugar and ¼ cup water.
  4. Swirl to combine well.
  5. Using a candy thermometer, heat over medium heat until it reaches soft ball stage (238 F).
  6. Do not stir during this process. If crystals form on pan walls, use brush with water to dissolve it back down.
  7. When at 238 F, remove from heat and slowly pour into mixer bowl with gelatin.
  8. Stir by hand for a couple minute to break any gelatin lumps.
  9. When cooled slightly, place on mixer with whisk attachment and combine at medium-high speed until white and somewhat stiff. About 8-9 minutes.
  10. Immediately transfer to large piping bag (14″ works well) with ½” tip. Alternatively, use gallon Ziplock bag with corner cut.
  11. With colored sugar in a shallow dish, pipe chick shapes directly into the sugar. If the shape doesn’t hold, let the mixture cool for a minute or two and try again.
  12. Use spoon to cover marshmallow chicks with sugar. Let cool for 30 minutes on tray.
  13. Enjoy!
North Carolina judges side with Republican colleague in close Supreme Court race

North Carolina judges side with Republican colleague in close Supreme Court race

By GARY D. ROBERTSON Associated Press

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina appeals court sided Friday with the trailing Republican candidate in an extremely close state Supreme Court election, a ruling that could flip the result of the nation’s only 2024 race that is still undecided.

In a 2-1 decision, a panel of the intermediate-level Court of Appeals ruled that ballots — likely tens of thousands of them — were wrongly allowed in the tally, and it gave some of those voters about three weeks to provide additional information or see the ballots get removed. The disputed ballots are believed to favor Democratic Associate Justice Allison Riggs, who, after two recounts, held a 734-vote lead over Republican Jefferson Griffin in their race, which saw over 5.5 million ballots cast.

The judges on Friday found that the State Board of Elections got it wrong in December when it dismissed Griffin’s election protests. The ruling is expected to be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Griffin’s postelection protests challenged over 65,000 ballots in three different categories. Griffin currently serves on the Court of Appeals and had recused himself from deliberations within the court, where some of his colleagues ruled favoring him.

The prevailing opinion declares that the board should have found that ballots from within each of three categories shouldn’t be counted because they failed to comply with state law or the state constitution. The decision also reverses the decision of a trial judge who in February upheld the board’s actions.

“Free elections under … the North Carolina Constitution include the right to an accurate counting of votes,” said the opinion backed by Judges John Tyson and Fred Gore, both registered Republicans. “Griffin has a legal right to inquire into this outcome through the statutorily-enacted and postelection procedures available to him.”

In two of those categories of challenged voters, the judges directed that the state board give voters in two of the categories 15 business days to provide their missing information or photo identification. If the information is provided in time, then those ballots would still count, the opinion reads.

Griffin’s attorneys have said previously that removing the challenged ballots would favor their client and likely make him the winner. The ballots challenged on the ID mandate, for example, largely came from Democratic-leaning counties. But it’s unclear how many voters would provide the information the judges say are necessary for the ballots to be counted.

In the third category — involving overseas voters who have never lived in the U.S. — their ballots should not count, according to Tyson and Gore.

Lawyers for Riggs and the board have said the ballots were cast lawfully based on state laws and rules that have been applied to elections for years and can’t be altered retroactively. Riggs’ allies have held rallies across the state demanding Griffin concede, saying he was trying to overturn the results of a fair election.

Court of Appeals Judge Toby Hampson, a registered Democrat writing a dissenting opinion, said that Griffin hadn’t identified a single voter who was ineligible to vote in the November elections under the laws and rules governing the election.

“To accept Petitioner’s indiscriminate efforts to call into doubt the votes of tens of thousands of otherwise eligible voters, without any showing any challenged voter was disqualified under existing law from voting is to elevate speculation and surmise over evidence and reason,” he wrote.

The eight-year term on the highest court in the ninth-largest state was supposed to begin in early January. Riggs has meanwhile remained serving in her seat. She’s also recused herself from preliminary deliberations in the protests that have already been heard by the Supreme Court.

Five of the six remaining justices on the Supreme Court that likely will review the Court of Appeals ruling are registered Republicans. Lawyers for Riggs and the board also have already signaled they will take the case to federal court should they lose in state court and Griffin takes the tally lead.

While The Associated Press declared more than 4,400 winners in the 2024 general election, the state Supreme Court election is the only race that is still undecided.

Recent News

Powered By SoCast