FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — Lionel Messi and Inter Miami are back in action Tuesday night in the Concacaf Champions Cup tournament.

Inter Miami will host Sporting Kansas City in the second leg of their first-round matchup in the annual tournament, which features soccer clubs from North America, Central America and the Caribbean.

Messi, the reigning MLS MVP and Argentine World champion, is expected to start and play against Sporting Kansas City. But it’s unclear how much he could play.

Messi has played every minute of the last two matches for Inter Miami. He scored in the 1-0 win at Sporting Kansas City last Wednesday in the first leg, and Inter Miami’s 2-2 draw in the MLS season opener against New York City FC last Saturday.

The match is the third in the last six days for both clubs, while Inter Miami will play eight matches in 40 days since their preseason began on Jan. 18. SKC lost its MLS season opener at Austin FC 1-0 on Saturday.

Here’s everything you need to know about Inter Miami-Sporting Kansas City tonight:

What time does Inter Miami vs. Sporting Kansas City match begin?

The game will begin at 8 p.m. ET (9 p.m. in Argentina) on Tuesday night.

How to watch Inter Miami vs. Sporting Kansas City match Tuesday?

The match will be available to watch FS2 in English and ViX in Spanish.

Who leads the Inter Miami-Sporting Kansas City Champions Cup series?

Inter Miami leads 1-0 on aggregate score. Messi scored the only goal in the first-round series.

What score does Inter Miami, Kansas City need to advance?

Inter Miami would advance to the next round with a win or draw by any score.
Kansas City would advance by scoring two or more goals in a one-goal victory (2-1, 3-2, etc.).
If SKC is up 1-0 after regulation, the match will be tied on aggregate score and go to a penalty shootout to determine the winner.

Who does Inter Miami or Sporting Kansas City face next round?

Jamaican league champion Cavalier FC earned a bye to the round of 16 in the Champions Cup tournament, and awaits the winner of Inter Miami vs. Sporting Kansas City.

When is Messi’s next game with Inter Miami?

Inter Miami’s second MLS game of the season will be on the road against the Houston Dynamo on March 2 during the second edition of the league’s ‘Sunday Night Soccer’ showcase.

Sporting Kansas City’s game plan: Slow Messi

Sporting KC coach Peter Vermes has routinely praised Messi before their matchups. Their plan is to deny Messi the ball and not give away possession in transition, but he knows Messi can still enforce his will at any time.

“There’s so many different coaches that have tried over the years, but you really just can’t put a game plan in for him because he’s one of those players, which there’s not very few, that can change the outcome of the game on their own,” Vermes said.

Inter Miami coach Javier Masherano faces tall task leading Messi

Messi is being coached by his former Barcelona and Argentina teammate Javier Mascherano in Inter Miami’s 2025 season. Despite the inherit pressure to help the club reach new heights, Mascherano is taking his new job in stride. It certainly helps having Messi and three other teammates in Luis Suarez, Sergio Busquets and Jordi Alba by his side.

“I’m not under pressure. I’m here, trying to do my best, trying to help the players to have success,” Mascherano said during Inter Miami’s preseason. “We are happy because we are doing the right things. We see on the pitch that we are working (well). It’s important going forward, keeping the same mentality we have now.”

MLS commissioner Don Garber shares excitement for 2025, 2026

Major League Soccer commissioner Don Garber believes the next two years will be a pivotal stretch for soccer in the United States. The 2025 MLS season marks the league’s 30th season. The FIFA Club World Cup will be played later this summer in the United States, and the FIFA World Cup next year is co-hosted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

“The World Cup is going to raise the attention of the sport in ways that nobody ever dreamed of,” Garber told USA TODAY Sports. “And I tell people who don’t understand soccer or MLS, they have no idea how big the World Cup is going to be. … Just wait, it’s going to be epic.”

Two Indiana Pacers fans are suing the Milwaukee Bucks and former Bucks guard Patrick Beverley after an incident during an NBA playoff game last year in Indianapolis.

In the lawsuit filed last Friday in Marion County (Ind.) Superior Court, two Pacers fans claim they experienced mental anguish and humiliation after Beverley twice threw a basketball toward fans behind the team bench late in the Bucks’ 120-98 playoff loss to the Pacers on May 2.

The two women plaintiffs say that despite Beverley’s actions, they were asked to leave the game.

The lawsuit names Beverley, the Bucks organization and former assistant coach Josh Oppenheimer as defendants in seeking compensation for lost wages and medical expenses.

“We believe that the Milwaukee Bucks fostered a culture of misconduct by their players without any repercussions,” said their attorney John Kautzman, according to the Indiana Lawyer. Bucks officials did not respond to a request for comment from the Indianapolis Star, and Beverley could not be immediately reached.

The NBA suspended Beverley, 36, for four games over the incident, but he has not served that punishment because he signed with Hapoel Tel Aviv BC in the Euroleague over the offseason.

Luka Doncic has played four games for the Los Angeles Lakers, and Anthony Davis has played one game for the Dallas Mavericks since the blockbuster trade between the two teams involving those two All-Stars.

The Feb. 1 trade agreement shocked the NBA – even league commissioner Adam Silver said “I was surprised when I heard about the trade. I did not know that Luka was potentially a player that was about to be traded. That was news to me,” – and the repercussions are both short-term and long-term for the Lakers, Mavericks and the league.

It’s still early, and sweeping conclusions are unjustified, but so far, the Lakers have won the trade – on the court and in the court of public opinion.

Let’s take a look at how the trade has worked so far ahead of Tuesday night’s game between the Lakers and Mavericks (10 p.m. ET, TNT).

Who won the Luka Doncic-Anthony Davis trade?

The Lakers with Luka Doncic

Doncic has played in four games and sat out four games due to injuries with the Lakers, who are 2-2 in the games he has played. The results have been mixed – losses to Charlotte and Utah were bad considering both teams are headed for top-five lottery picks.

However, Saturday’s 123-100 victory against smoking-hot Denver was impressive. Doncic had 32 points, 10 rebounds, seven assists and four steals, and Doncic and LeBron James combined for 57 points, 19 rebounds, 12 assists, five steals and three blocks.

Before Saturday, the Lakers were 3-14 against the Nuggets since the start of the 2022-23 season. The Nuggets ousted the Lakers from the 2023 playoffs in four games and the 2024 playoffs in five games.

Los Angeles needed that win, and Doncic helped provide it. His offense alongside James will give the Lakers a chance for a deep playoff run, especially if they can secure a top-four seed in the West. James passing to Doncic, Doncic passing to James and both passing to teammates will continue to create problems for defenses.

Also remember, the Lakers only had to give up one first-round pick to acquire a player who is a five-time All-Star, five-time All-NBA selection and third-place finisher in the 2023-24 MVP race. The young star turns 26 Friday.

The Mavericks with Anthony Davis

Davis sustained an adductor (inner thigh) strain in his Mavericks debut Feb. 8 and has been out since. He was in the middle of a fantastic game with 26 points, 16 rebounds, seven assists and three blocks when the injury occurred. He will be re-evaluated around March 6.

It hurts the Mavericks that Davis is not on the court, especially since the defending Western Conference champions are tied for seventh and just one game behind the sixth-place Los Angeles Clippers. The Mavericks made this trade for several reasons, and one was Doncic’s absences related to health issues. However, Davis – while he has been mostly available this season and last season – has a history of injuries that have sidelined him for significant portions of a season.

Davis remains one of the best offensive-defensive two-way big men in the league, and the Mavs’ success depends on Davis.

The Max Christie part of this trade shouldn’t be overlooked, either. He was beginning to find his role as a starter and 3-point shooter for the Lakers. In eight games, he has nearly doubled his scoring average this season from 8.5 with the Lakers to 15.3 with Dallas. His 3-point percentage has jumped from .368 with Los Angeles to .436 with the Mavericks. His minutes and opportunities have increased after the trade and he scored at least 15 points in his first seven games with his new team, including 23 points in a victory against Houston.

But that is secondary to the public relations disaster surround the Mavericks over this trade.

Dallas fans remain unhappy about the trade and the character assassination of Doncic on his way out of Dallas and there is head-scratching around the league, especially among players.

Silver said, “In terms of the Dallas fans, all I can say to them is again, time will tell whether it was a smart trade, but I think they should believe in their organization. Their organization truly made a trade that they believed was in the best interest of the organization, and in many cases, again, it doesn’t mean they were right or wrong, but it’s very difficult to put yourself in their shoes. They are living with the situation. They have a philosophical belief on what’s necessary ultimately to win championships, and I’m not in a position to second-guess that.”

Silver might not be in position to second-guess that trade – and he shouldn’t – but outside the league office, the second-guessing will continue. For a long time.

Life in a men’s college basketball power conference has pros and cons. On the plus side, there are ample opportunities for quality wins to enhance one’s NCAA Tournament profile. Of course, a series of those marquee matchups can turn into losing streaks in a hurry.

All of which is to say there’s plenty of teams rising and falling in our latest edition of Bracketology projecting the field of 68. The Big Ten is one conference responsible for much of the movement in both directions. Michigan State has rebounded from a blip earlier this month and is up to a No. 2 seed after a strong week that has the Spartans in a share of the league lead. Maryland also continues to trend upward. The Terrapins are a fifth seed with eight wins in nine games.

On the negative side, Purdue has fallen to a projected No. 4 seed thanks to a four-game skid. Illinois – once a contender for the top 16 seeds – is now closer to bubble territory after three losses in a row.

TIGERS ON TOP: Auburn maintains No. 1 spot in poll ahead of Duke

Elsewhere, St. John’s continues its steady climb, now slated as a No. 3 seed after completing a sweep of two-time defending champion Connecticut. Speaking of the Huskies, they along with recent champions Kansas and Baylor from the Big 12 are other teams now on the back of the bracket.

Last four in

Ohio State, San Diego State, Oklahoma, Wake Forest.

First four out

North Carolina, Xavier, Boise State, Villanova.

NCAA Tournament bids conference breakdown

Multi-bid leagues: SEC (13), Big Ten (10), Big 12 (8), ACC (4), Big East (4), Mountain West (3), West Coast (2).

Technology came a long way in the 11 years since the BCS computers powered down, and Elon Musk’s latest artificial intelligence bot has CFP ideas.
Grok 3, an A.I. platform, doesn’t care for the 4+4+2+2+1+1 College Football Playoff format that’s laden with auto-bids.
What’s the best and fairest College Football Playoff format? Artificial intelligence suggests a tweaked format remaining at 12 teams.

The more Greg Sankey and Tony Petitti brainstorm ideas for the future of the College Football Playoff, the more I think I’ll be longing for the Bowl Championship Series rankings by the time these commissioners complete their harebrained plan.

Technology came a long way in the 11 years since the BCS computers powered down. Now, computers do much more than spit out rankings. They think for us, too.

I turned to artificial intelligence to see if it could hatch a better idea than the 4+4+2+2+1+1 playoff bracket model the SEC and Big Ten reportedly are considering for expansion in 2026, when the conferences steered by Sankey and Petitti take control of the playoff format.

Let’s see how Sankey and Petitti match wits with Grok 3. He’s Elon Musk’s latest A.I. bot.

Grok 3 needed just a few seconds to spit out ideas when I asked him for the best and fairest CFP format.

Grok started with the disclaimer that “best and fairest” depends on what you value most.

Sure, understood. We all harbor different opinions. But I’m exhausted by the commissioners’ ideas, so, please, Mr. Computer, let’s hear yours.

Grok obliged and suggested four ideas.

He started by offering sticking with the status quo of a 12-team playoff, including automatic bids for the five best conference champions, seven at-large selections, with byes reserved for conference champions.

I already like how you’re thinking, Sir Grok. This initial year of the 12-team playoff worked pretty well. I wouldn’t mind seeing a few more iterations of this setup before we jump to any changes. As Grok pointed out, though, this format works best “when the committee nails the rankings.’ Whether the committee nails the rankings depends on your perspective, but most of us would agree the committee flubbed by seeding Ohio State No. 8. The Buckeyes should’ve been No. 5, reserved in this format for the best at-large team.

LAST PIECE: SEC playing nine league games could finalize playoff expansion

Never mind all that, though, because Grok has other ideas. He suggested an eight-team bracket with auto bids for the SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12, Pac-12 and Group of Five, plus two at-large bids.

Earth to Grok. This idea is outdated. Musk’s bot must have missed that the Pac-12 became an unrecognizable husk after raids by other power conferences. It appears Grok 3 didn’t work out all the bugs from Grok 1 or Grok 2.

Let’s go easy on him, though. He works for free, unlike a commissioner earning a $4 million salary. Plus, he’s got more ideas.

You might be thinking, if Grok has so many ideas, why do we need Sankey or Petitti?

Or, you might be thinking, couldn’t Grok replace you, Mr. Sports Columnist? Well, that might come around the bend, but, first, let’s see if the bot solves this CFP conundrum.

Grok’s next suggestion: a 16-team playoff, with all the bids filled via at-large selection. The eight first-round games would be played on campus sites.

I like it! I’m typically of the mind that expanding the playoff beyond 12 teams would water down the field, but I so detest the idea of a 4+4+2+2+1+1 model, in which 13 of the 14 bids would be auto bids, that I’m open to fresh ideas.

Grok began to win me over with his rationale for a 16-team bracket filled with at-large picks. He acknowledged that conference championships would be devalued, but the regular season would turn “into a free-for-all,” as Grok put it, while teams jockey to be in the top eight to host or make the final cut of entrants.

Let’s just dispense with conference championships in this 16-team model and insert in their place a 13th regular-season game for all teams. These extra games would offer another data point for playoff selection, plus more revenue opportunities. What do you say, Grok? I think we make a good team when we put our heads together.

Grok is keeping his eye open to future work opportunities, too. Clever fella. He suggested ditching humans selecting and seeding the 16-team field and having a computer decide, although he admitted that would surrender “the human nuance fans love.”

Fair point, Grok, but the more I hear from whiny conference commissioners, the less endearing I find “human nuance.”

Finally, Grok offered the model Sankey and Petitti are pushing for the 2025 season: a 12-team bracket seeded strictly off rankings. Five conference champions would receive automatic bids in this format, but bye protection for conference champions would be removed. Teams ranked in the top four would receive byes, regardless of whether they won a conference championship.

Grok likes this format best, arguing it “strikes the best balance” by respecting the regular season, admitting diverse teams into the playoff and seeding off performance rather than conference tie-ins.

OK, Grok, I hear ya. Not my favorite model. I prefer the current 12-team setup, with byes for conference champions, but he’s also grabbed my interest with his idea for a 16-team bracket selected and seeded by computers.

Notably, Grok made no mention of the zany 4+4+2+2+1+1 idea that originated in the Big Ten and now seems to be gaining steam within the SEC. In this idea that Grok ignored, nearly all of the bids would be divvied up to conferences before the season begins. Four auto bids apiece would go to the Big Ten and SEC, with two each going to the ACC and Big 12, one to the Group of Five and one at-large.

By shunning this plan, Grok earned some credibility. I like how this guy thinks. Why stop with the CFP?

Grok, how would you like to be College Football commissioner? We’ve got a few more issues to solve.

Blake Toppmeyer is the USA TODAY Network’s national college football columnist. Email him at BToppmeyer@gannett.com and follow him on X @btoppmeyer. Subscribe to read all of his columns.

There’s a subtle but important fight beginning Tuesday, one last stand for the rest of college football against the overwhelming might of the SEC and Big Ten.

One last chance to show some negotiation chops.

The Big Ten and SEC want straight seeding for the 2025 College Football Playoff. The ACC, Big 12 and the other six FBS conferences don’t.

The question is, how badly do the Big Ten and SEC want it?

Bad enough to make the other conferences financially whole no matter the format? Bad enough for guarantees with the future College Football Playoff format beginning in 2026, where the Big Ten and SEC don’t need unanimous agreement to change the rules?

Simply put, everyone gets a vote for the 2025 format, and it must be unanimous. Beginning in 2026 and moving forward, the Big Ten and SEC can do whatever they want.

That’s what makes Tuesday’s CFP meeting in Dallas so critical. Despite an offseason full of acknowledging future format change beginning in 2026, there’s still 2025 to deal with. 

In 2026 and beyond, the SEC and Big Ten will set the format, and how the more than $1 billion annually is paid out — just for the CFP. They were given this power last year when the new media rights contract was negotiated because the rest of the Bowl Subdivision didn’t want the two super conferences pulling away and forming their own association.

And taking the College Football Playoff with them.

“It would be great for our sport if we had a system that rewarded the regular season, and the road teams take to get there,” Georgia coach Kirby Smart said late last season. ‘I can’t imagine a more difficult road than going through our conference.’ 

LAST PIECE: SEC playing nine league games could finalize playoff expansion

So here we are at the fork in the road, and the obvious flaw in the 2025 format needs to be addressed. But for the current format of rewarding first-round byes to conference champions, No. 3 seed Boise State would’ve been No. 9 in a 1-12 seeded format, and No. 4 Arizona State would’ve been No.12 ― per the final CFP poll.

More important, Oregon’s reward for earning the No. 1 overall seed would’ve been a second-round game against the winner of No. 8 Indiana vs. No. 9 Boise State — instead of a Rose Bowl against eventual national champion Ohio State.

Georgia’s reward for earning the No. 2 overall seed would’ve been a Sugar Bowl against the winner of No. 7. Tennessee vs. No. 10 SMU — instead of a game against eventual national runner-up Notre Dame. 

See the problem?

The Big Ten and SEC say the straight seed format is best for all involved, and places an emphasis on successful regular seasons. But it would take a rare season from a champion of the Big 12 or ACC (or Group of Five champion) to supplant the SEC and Big Ten champions from the top two spots in any straight seeded poll. 

Since the playoff system began in 2014, only ACC schools Clemson (four times) and Florida State have been ranked in the top two. Oregon (2014), Oklahoma (2017) and Washington (2023) were also ranked in the top two from the Pac-12 and Big 12, but are now part of either the SEC or Big Ten. 

The ACC, Big 12 and Group of Five conferences see this through a financial lens. First-round byes are guaranteed moves into the quarterfinals, where teams are paid more to reach that level: $4 million for qualifying for the CFP, and $4 million for reaching the quarterfinals, $6 million for reaching the semifinals, and $6 million for reaching the final.

By moving to straight seeding for the 2025 season, the Big 12, ACC and Group of Five are potentially giving up $4 million by eliminating a direct move into the quarterfinal round without the bye.

The Big Ten and SEC say they want the same straight seeded bracket system used to determine nearly every NCAA sport. The same system that’s easy to follow and understand, and sell to media rights partners. 

A system that has used tournaments and brackets to grow NCAA sports, be it through media rights deals, advertising, and yes, gambling. Men’s basketball has essentially become a five-week sport because of the wildly successful tournament, fueled – in large part – by gambling.

You don’t really think CBS and Turner Sports paid $8.8 billion for regular-season basketball games, do you?

A straight seed tournament also eliminates confusion for the CFP selection committee, which was hamstrung by the quirky system in the first year of the 12-team format.

“Those folks have a very difficult job,” Penn State coach James Franklin said last month. “We all should be for what makes it easier for all involved.”

But at what price for the Big Ten and SEC? 

Matt Hayes is the senior national college football writer for USA TODAY Sports Network. Follow him on X at @MattHayesCFB.

Dan Hooker has been forced to withdraw from his fight against Justin Gaethje at UFC 313 on March 8 at T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas due to a hand injury.

In a social media post, Hooker announced in a video uploaded to YouTube that he would not participate in the five-round, 155-pound fight against Gaethje, which was the co-headlining UFC 313 event. Hooker is currently on a three-fight win streak, boasting a record of 24 wins and 12 losses. His most recent victory was a split decision against Mateusz Gamrot at UFC 305.

It remains uncertain who will enter the ring to fight Gaethje, who is eagerly anticipating his return after a tough knockout loss against Max Holloway during the final seconds of a five-round match.

Despite Hooker’s withdrawal, the main event at UFC 313 is a light heavyweight title fight between Alex Pereira and Magomed Ankalaev and will continue as planned.

How to watch UFC 313: Pereira vs. Ankalaev

UFC 313: Pereira vs. Ankalaev is scheduled for Saturday, March 8, at T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Date: Saturday, March 8
Time: 6 p.m. ET
TV: ESPNEWS
Stream: ESPN+, Disney+
Location: T-Mobile Arena (Las Vegas, NV)

UFC 313: Pereira vs. Ankalaev card

Main Card:

Light Heavyweight: Alex Pereira vs. Magomed Ankalaev
Lightweight: Justin Gaethje vs. TBD
Heavyweight: Curtis Blaydes vs. Rizvan Kuniev
Lightweight: Jalin Turner vs. Ignacio Bahamondes
Lightweight: King Green vs. Mauricio Ruffy

Prelims:

Women’s Strawweight: Amanda Lemos vs. Iasmin Lucindo
Featherweight: Mairon Santos vs. Francis Marshall

Early Prelims:

Middleweight: Brunno Ferreira vs. Armen Petrosyan
Welterweight: Alex Morono vs. Carlos Leal
Middleweight: Djorden Santos vs. Ozzy Diaz
Chris Gutierrez vs. TBD

We occasionally recommend interesting products and services. If you make a purchase by clicking one of the links, we may earn an affiliate fee. USA TODAY Network newsrooms operate independently, and this doesn’t influence our coverage.