So, as I watched the last 90 seconds of Mississippi State’s overtime victory over Ole Miss last Saturday night at Starkville, I got to thinking: What would Dr. James Naismith, the inventor of basketball, think?

I had plenty of time to think. Because of video reviews, timeouts, fouls, free throws and more replay reviews, the last 90 seconds of playing time lasted 17 minutes of real time. The game itself took two hours, 41 minutes. That’s 161 minutes if you are keeping score, which is roughly four times the length of time the ball actually was in play.

I think I know what Naismith would think. I believe he would think: You know, this is not really what I had in mind.

Some historic perspective is necessary here. Dr. Naismith was not yet a doctor when he conjured up the game we call basketball. Later to become a doctor of both divinity and of medicine, Naismith was a recently hired YMCA training school instructor at Springfield (Mass.) College in December of 1891, 134 years and change ago. His boss, Dean Luther Gillick charged Naismith with the task of developing a new indoor sport to fill the void between football and baseball seasons. Seems the Springfield students were terribly bored with gymnastics.

Gillick told Naismith he wanted a sport that required skill and sportsmanship. He wanted a game that provided exercise for the whole body, yet a game played without extreme roughness causing damage to players and equipment. Had they watched the Rebels and Bulldogs last Saturday night, Gllick and Naismith might have covered their eyes. Extreme roughness and physicality ruled the night.

But all in all, Naismith did fairly well. Take last Saturday night, for example: Certainly none of players, nor the more than 9,000 fans at The Hump, were the least bit bored, except for during the numerous replay reviews. 

Given his advanced degree in divinity, Naismith probably would admit he was fortunate in some ways. For instance, after sketching out his idea for the sport, Naismith sent a janitor in search of two 15-inch by 15-inch boxes to hang at either end of the gymnasium. Basketball was almost boxball. Hoops was almost squares. The janitor couldn’t find the appropriate boxes and returned to Naismith carrying two peach baskets. And, yes, the baskets had bottoms. Initially a ladder was needed to retrieve the ball after made baskets.

Naismith’s class had 18 students. So it was the first game of basketball matched nine against nine. Tacking, pushing, holding and tripping were prohibited, but, then, so was dribbling. Clearly, as Bob Cousy, Pete Maravich, Juju Murray and Josh Hubbard have illustrated, the game would evolve. The first game, played with a soccer ball, ended with the score one to nothing. Accuracy has evolved, too.

Naismith’s game quickly grew in popularity, especially In the northeast. Naismith became something of a hero. In fact, some folks suggested the new sport be called Naismith-ball. To his everlasting credit, Naismith flatly rejected the idea.

You, as I, may wonder how some of the terms we use in basketball today came about. For instance, the player who patrols the area closest to the goal is often called the post-man even though there is no mail involved. Sometimes, he plays the low post. Sometimes, he moves farther away from the basketball and plays the high post. Why post? Glad you asked. Back in Naismith’s day, most gyms, including the one in Springfield, had posts in the middle of the courts to hold up the ceilings. The players had to maneuver around the posts. The player who played near the posts closest to the baskets was called the post-man.

Back then, many of the courts were elevated and doubled as stages (think Memorial Coliseum at Vanderbilt). There was an inherent danger of players falling off the stages and breaking legs, arms and noggins. Netting was often put up around the courts to protect the players from such danger, giving the playing floor the visual effect of a cage. And that’s why basketball players are often still referred to a cagers. Now you know.

Women took to the sport from almost the very beginning. The first women’s game was played in 1892 at Northampton, Mass. Men were not allowed to attend because the women played the game in bloomers. Uniforms, too, have evolved.

“Basketball,” Naismith wrote, “is a game to play. You don’t coach it.” Chris Jans and Chris Beard, two guys who make millions, surely would disagree. But maybe Naismith had the right idea. All that coaching – which happens mostly during TV timeouts – is part of what makes the last 90 seconds of a close game last more than 10 times that long.

In his book about basketball, Naismith wrote, “Let us all be able to lose gracefully and to win courteously; to accept criticism as well as praise; and, last of all, to appreciate the attitude of the other fellow at all times.”

Dr. Naismith, we can reasonably surmise, would not have appreciated the numerous refrains of “Go to hell Ole Miss” and “ref, you suck” last Saturday night.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

A bill that aims to increase pharmacy benefit managers’ transparency by requiring them to report data to the agency that oversees pharmacy practice in Mississippi passed in the House of Representatives Thursday. 

But the Board of Pharmacy and some pharmacists say the legislation doesn’t do enough to help pharmacies and patients. 

House Speaker Jason White, who authored the bill, called it “a good first step.” It will give the Board of Pharmacy – and the public – insight into the companies’ business practices to ensure they are compliant with the law, he told Mississippi Today.

The bill, which passed 88-8, does the following:

• Prohibits pharmacy benefit managers from charging insurers more for drugs than pharmacists are paid, a practice that can be used by the companies to inflate their profits. 
• Requires pharmacy benefit managers to submit reports detailing the rebates, or cost savings, they receive from pharmaceutical companies and to disclose their affiliations with pharmacies to the Board of Pharmacy. 
• Requires drug manufacturers and health insurers to submit reports detailing wholesale drug costs and information about drug costs and spending, respectively, to the Board of Pharmacy.
• Tasks the Board of Pharmacy with developing a website summarizing the reports.
• Allows the Board of Pharmacy to issue subpoenas during audits of pharmacy benefit managers and forces the company to pay for the audit if it is found to be noncompliant with state statute. 

It will next go to the Senate for consideration. 

But some advocates say the bill does not do enough to protect independent pharmacists, or retail pharmacies not owned by a publicly traded company or affiliated with a large chain, and the customers they serve. 

Many Mississippi independent pharmacists fear they may be forced to close as a result of low payments from pharmacy benefit managers, which small businesses do not have the leverage to negotiate. 

“Collecting the data is one thing. Doing something with it is another,” said Robert Dozier, the executive director of the Mississippi Independent Pharmacy Association. “When you look at the legislation, it does nothing to help the pharmacists, and it’s not tightening the loopholes that the Board of Pharmacy needs. It’s not going to do a whole lot.” 

In a statement read by Rep. Stacey Hobgood-Wilkes, a Republican from Picayune and chair of the Drug Policy committee, on the House Floor, the Mississippi Board of Pharmacy requested that the legislation be amended to heighten the regulatory enforcement authority it holds over pharmacy benefit managers, though it did not name specific tools that would be helpful.

The Board of Pharmacy did not respond to a request for comment by the time the story published. 

Dozier said he supports a bill brought by Hobgood-Wilkes which institutes a standardized pricing model for prescription drugs based on national average drug costs. 

Several states, including Kentucky, have passed laws that use the pricing model to regulate drug costs. 

But White said the House is not yet ready to approve a specific pricing model, and that he would not vote for Hobgood-Wilkes’ bill if it made it to the House floor.  

In the past, legislation to regulate pharmacy benefit managers in Mississippi has struggled to gain support. A 2023 bill proposed by Hobgood-Wilkes using the same standardized pricing model died in the House Insurance Committee, chaired by Rep. Jerry Turner, R-Baldwyn. 

A 2024 bill that would have increased pricing transparency and prohibited pharmacy benefit managers from retaliating against pharmacies or charging insurance plans or patients more than the amount they paid pharmacies for a prescription died in the House.

White said he would support appropriations for additional staff to allow the Board of Pharmacy to carry out new responsibilities included in the bill. 

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Mississippi lawmakers will consider requiring state prisons to provide inmates on work assignments with protective gear.

The legislation follows an ongoing federal lawsuit alleging inmates at a Mississippi prison were exposed to dangerous chemicals, with some later contracting late-stage cancer.

Susan Balfour, 63, was incarcerated for 33 years at Central Mississippi Correctional Facility until her release in December 2021. Balfour said she was among a group of prisoners asked to clean the facility without protective equipment.

She was later diagnosed with terminal breast cancer, a condition that prison health care providers failed to identify years ago because they could save money by not performing necessary medical screenings and treatment, according to the lawsuit Balfour filed in the U.S. Southern District of Mississippi.

Rep. Justis Gibbs, D-Jackson, says his proposal, inspired in part by Balfour’s story, addresses the first of a two-pronged issue that leaves Mississippi’s prison inmates vulnerable to dangerous conditions.

“On the front end, it is about protecting our inmates from exposure to raw chemicals and mixing raw chemicals without any protective equipment,” Gibbs said. “The other prong is of course the lack of medical care in terms of the corrections system and its inmates.”

Gibbs’ bill, which has been referred to the House Corrections Committee, would ensure that if an inmate uses raw cleaning chemicals, prison officials must provide them with protective equipment such as face masks, gloves, protective helmets and eye protection. Balfour’s attorneys and Gibbs say over 10 other Mississippi inmates have come down with cancer or become seriously ill after they were exposed to chemicals while on work assignments.

“I’m grateful that state lawmakers have acknowledged this injustice,” Balfour said in a written statement. “Forcing women to work with raw chemicals and cleaning supplies without protective equipment is hazardous and deeply problematic. If successful, this effort will help prevent others from enduring what many have suffered at the hands of the Mississippi Department of Corrections.”

Pauline Rogers, co-founder of the RECH Foundation, an organization that assists women returning from prison, said Gibbs’ bill provides a long overdue safeguard for inmates, who are often encouraged to work while incarcerated in areas such as food service, maintenance and groundkeeping.

“The issue has arisen in Mississippi’s prisons, in part, due to longstanding neglect, underfunding, and systemic dehumanization within the correctional system. Incarcerated individuals are often viewed as expendable rather than as individuals with rights,” Rogers said. “This disregard leads to unsafe working environments, where profit and efficiency are prioritized over basic safety measures.”

The Mississippi Department of Corrections did not respond to a request for comment.

Balfour says she used products that contained chemicals such as glyphosate, which has been linked to an increased risk of cancer in some studies. Balfour’s attorneys have said they have not proven with certainty that exposure to the cleaning chemicals caused Balfour’s cancer. But the lawsuit focuses on what they say were substantial delays and denial of medical treatment that could have detected her cancer earlier.

Incentives in contracts with the state Department of Corrections encouraged cost-cutting by reducing outpatient referrals to health care providers and interfering with physicians’ independent clinical judgments, the lawsuit alleges.

Balfour was initially convicted of murdering a police officer and sentenced to death, but that conviction was later reversed in 1992 after the Mississippi Supreme Court found her constitutional rights had been violated during her trial. She later reached a plea agreement on a lesser charge, her attorney said.

Balfour believes her cancer may have been detectable over a decade ago. After she was released in 2021, an outpatient doctor performed a mammogram that showed she had stage four breast cancer, her lawsuit says.

Balfour sued three companies contracted to provide health care to prisoners at the Central Mississippi Correctional Facility. The companies delayed or failed to schedule follow-up cancer screenings for Balfour even though they had been recommended by prison physicians, the lawsuit says.

Gibbs hopes to introduce legislation in the future that provides stronger guarantees that inmates receive timely medical care.

“While we do have a Department of Corrections, it’s also lawmakers’ duty and responsibility to ensure that there are human rights for our state’s inmates,” Gibbs said.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.