Archive for the ‘persistence’ Category

Game 7: Bulls @ Brooklyn

Sunday, May 5th, 2013

It’s vacation time!  This will be my last blog until Tuesday, May 14.  Look forward to returning with more stories to entertain and inspire.

Whatever anyone says about Jerry Tarkanian, no one refutes he was the master of getting guys to play hard.  The one type of guy who Tark couldn’t stand to have on his team, whom he knew that if he played, sooner or later, they were going to lose.  He called that kind of player a “Cool Guy.”  I haven’t talked to him yet about the Chicago Bulls but I imagine he was totally impressed.  Not because they won in Game 7 but because . . . they don’t have any cool guys.

One coach Tark has always been unbelievably impressed with is Tom Thibodeau.  Tibbs doesn’t like cool guys either.  He took a Chicago Bulls team without Kirk Heinrich, Luol Deng and, of course, Derrick Rose, a former MVP whose services he hasn’t had all year, into Brooklyn’s brand new digs and came out a winner.  He took a franchise which has had incredible success - but had never, NEVER, won a game 7 on the road.  Yet they did it.  Why?

Thibodeau has been telling us all along:

“We have enough.”

Could LeBron Be the Best Ever?

Saturday, May 4th, 2013

So LeBron James is going to be the MVP of the NBA.  A probability nearly as certain is that he will lead the Miami Heat to their second consecutive championship.  A year of debilitating injuries to guys who could influence games’ outcomes, e.g. Rose, Rondo, Westbrook, Nash, Bryant, Griffin, Gallinari and Lee seemed to align the stars perfectly for a Miami repeat.  Not that they weren’t poised for a repeat anyway, but if ever was there a year they could get by without Dwyane Wade at 100%, this one’s it.

Tomorrow’s MVP award will be his fourth, as many as Wilt, one shy of MJ and Bill Russell, two fewer than Kareem.  It will also be his fourth in five years, the string split by Derrick Rose, who, after taking the entire year off in order to be 100% when he returns, could pose a threat to both accomplishments (MVP and NBA champion) in the future.

Michael and Russ accomplished the duel feat a record 4 times, Larry and Kareem twice, and eight others once.  So, assuming the Heat live up to expectations, the championship would be theirs and LBJ would move into the company of Bird and Jabbar.  Certainly elite company but, as anyone who knows LeBron, or has talked to him, or has read about him, or has heard about him, . . . understands is that elite company is not his goal.  Unique is the level to which he aspires.

He turned 28 a little more than four months ago.  He’s in better shape than 98% of the guys he plays against and has enough resources to keep up with any new advances in science and technology, be they in nutrition, strength training, flexibility, cardiovascular or psychological.  How much longer can he play barring serious injury, at a championship/ MVP level?  Eight more years puts him at 36.  That’s a lot of hardware he could haul.

The obvious question then is: Is he the best player of all-time?  Maybe it’s my age or when I was involved with basketball at a level just below the NBA but my answer could lie in an old joke:

“George Washington was first in war, first in peace, first in the hearts of his countrymen.  First president of the United States.  But he married a widow - which just goes to show, that no matter how hard you try, you can’t be first in everything.”

The Celtics vs. the Lakers

Monday, April 29th, 2013

Yesterday, both Boston and the Lakers were down 0-3.  It was apparent that neither was going to win its series.  Yet the Celtics won Game 4 in Boston, knowing that all they have to look forward to is the Knicks’ inevitable series-clincher in New York.   Meanwhile, the Lakers lost to San Antonio in LA.  Can we conclude anything from these two performances?  Even though, without Rondo, the Celtics had almost no chance of advancing, they were well aware they didn’t dare let their long-time, ticket-buying fans down in an elimination game.  Apparently, the Lakers’ relationship with their fans isn’t quite as intimate as that of the Celts.

On TNT’s pregame show, Kenny Smith even exclaimed that he’d heard Jack Nicholson gave his tickets to his cousin.  Which, of course, was absurd.  Because Jack has a relationship with the Lakers that’s stronger than a series sweep (against - he’s witnessed the flip side), even if it’s his favorite team getting blown out twice in a row.  He remembers the past - and looks forward to the future.  Whatever (and whomever) it brings.

For the record: how many people who were criticizing the way Mike D’Antoni coached yesterday’s game would have wanted to switch places with him?  And for those foolish enough to say yes, do you really think the outcome would have been any different because of your brilliant bench manuevering?  If you do, there are talk show hosts and hundreds of callers waiting to abuse you on the Subway fresh take hot lines, #1-25.

Truthfully, Boston had a shot at winning yesterday and the Lakers didn’t.  For that game, they’d lost their their starting small forward and top four guards - one of whom happens to be one the top three players in the game.  They were so decimated with injuries, nothing could have been done against the Spurs.  Nothing.

Whether or not that is true for the entire season will remain a mystery.  The saddest part of the entire year is the truth behind Charles Barkley’s statement regarding the Lakers’ pitiful performance in Game 3:

“It’s not too many times you can take the Lakers +30 - and lose.”

TNT’s “Inside the NBA” Talent Is Playing with Dynamite

Friday, April 26th, 2013

As television programs go, there are many that aren’t as captivating as Inside the NBA.  The show is so entertaining that I know people who don’t watch the NBA game that’s televised that night yet will tune into Ernie & the ex-NBA stars.  The word that’s used when people try to explain why it wins awards is chemistry.

Ernie Johnson is the moderator and, maybe because he understands which guys the viewers want to hear, or maybe because he wants to keep getting paid large dollars, or maybe because it’s what his bosses tell him to do, he relinquishes the stage to Charles Barkley, Kenny Smith and Shaquille O’Neal.  Since everyone has an opinion (and they all stink - the punchline of an old adage) and this is my blog, I’ll let you know mine.  I feel the best the show was was either when it started and it was only a three-man operation, or when they added Greg Anthony.  Maybe I like guards better, but I didn’t think Chris Webber added anything to the show and I think Shaq takes away from it.

For my (cable subscription) money, I don’t see where a fourth person is necessary.  In the beginning (not to compare the show to The Bible, it’s not that good), Ernie provided the knowledge that a television pro needs to know - plus he’d throw in a witticism every so often.  Kenny’s opinion was gleaned from a guard’s point of view, as well as that of a player who not only was a member of, but was a major contributor to the championship team.  Charles gave commentary from a big man’s perspective, and also that of a Hall of Famer.  Plus, he’d say blurt out statements like, “There’s a fight I wouldn’t break up,” when player-enforcers David West and Kenyon Martin started to scuffle.  That combination was enough.  And perfect.  Why the producers or directors or Ted Turner or whoever thought the show needed anyone else is as shocking as why they continue to allow Shaq overdo whatever schtick comes to his mind.

What the fans get to see is how varied opinions, based on their experiences, can be - whether you hear analysis from a guard (Kenny or Greg), “The guards need to establish tempo” or from the big guys (Charles, C Webb or Shaq), “They need to get the ball inside.”  The fans also get - or have to put up with - depending on the reason a viewer is tuning in, the tomfoolery among the combatants.  Often it is hilarious, sometimes with the on-air banter, sometimes with the vignettes the producers put together to tease the guys in the studio.  Charles has been an amazingly good sport as the other guys, including those not on camera, continually poke fun at him for various mistakes he’s made, things he’s said or . . . pretty much anything from his life.  However, his attitude might just be a case of a healthy salary because the Chuckster once said on-air “I can be bought.  If they paid me enough, I’d work for the Klan.”  Make no mistake about that, however.  On that, he was joking.

Kenny is the perfect foil to Charles (or maybe it’s the other way around).  Charles knows the bond the two of them have is such that anytime Kenny’s embarrassing him, it’s only for the sake of good TV.  Kenny does a great job when he’s explaining video, illustrating his point so that someone who’s not that into the hoops can understand the point he’s trying to make.

Shaq seems to have been added more to capture the interest of a different demographic of basketball fan with his references to today’s music, dance and lingo.  The issue with him is he overdoes it.  His stuff becomes old and tired - and he refuses to let up.  He either doesn’t know he’s annoying or doesn’t care.  Or enjoys it!  I mean wasn’t there anybody in the studio telling him “Birdman, Birdman” was getting old?  I’m not sure how many times he said it last night but, then again, I can’t count to infinity.

The show has obvious off-camera, inside jokes among the four of them, but those are almost funny in a teasing sort of way.  The show can have it’s serious moments as well (apart from the obvious basketball talk).  Although Charles can learn from Shaq about overdoing something (enough already with the “Only God’s an expert,”), Chuck has made several poignant statements.  It’s apparent when he’s passionate about a topic, e.g. remarking on not taking being an NBA player as seriously as those of the five other professions he mentioned (teacher, policeman, fireman, doctor, military) - although plumbers, electricians, maintenance workers, auto mechanics and others working in fields outside the five he mentioned might be offended.  His sincerity does show through.  As it did when he remarked:

“The great thing about sports is that it takes you away from reality.”

Belated Congrats to Tark on Getting into the HOF

Tuesday, April 16th, 2013

It’s no secret I felt Jerry Tarkanian should have been in the Hall of Fame.  Well, he finally got voted in and I didn’t blog a thing about it.  Since I, and several others, worked on righting what we saw as a wrong (for six years), allow me to share part of the four-page document I passed along to people I knew who had “juice,” people “who knew people” and media outlets (including USA Today).  The season-by-season records were naturally included; what follows is a list of items that separated Jerry from others.

Tangible reasons:

            1 – Overall record: 990-228 (81.3%); Division I: 784-202 (79.5%), 729-201 (78.4%) counting vacated games                                                                             

            2 – 4 Final Fours (’77, ’87, ’90, ’91); National Champions in 1990  

3 – 38-18 (67.9%) in NCAA Tournament games

            4 – Undefeated seasons 1963-64 (JC); 1990-91 (D-I regular season)

            5 – Won four straight Cal JC titles (1963-67)-at two JC’s (Riverside & Pasadena)

            6 – Won at least 20 games at three different D-I schools in his first year at each – (every school was way down when he got there)               

            7 – Won championships at high school, JC & D-I levels

            8 – 29 twenty-win seasons, 2nd to only Dean Smith who had 30

            9 – Was the first to start five black players (’64 Olympic Trials, before Don Haskins’ Texas Western national champions) – and won it

            10 – 42 NBA draft picks, 12 first-rounders

Intangible reasons:

            1 – The most difficult job a coach has is to get his or her team to play hard.  Whether a coach is a supporter of Tark’s or his severest critic, no one will ever

                  say his teams didn’t play hard

            2 - Won playing 1-2-2 zone, full court m-m, half court pressure m-m, amoeba

            3 – His strength was his weakness: loyalty.  His biggest flaw was he didn’t hold  kids accountable because he let people be themselves.  He was the anti-

                  authoritative coach.  It was always about the players; never about him.  

 

            4 – What started all the controversy was when the Long Beach Press-Telegram requested he write an article and he was critical of what he felt was the

                  hypocrisy within the organization.  Many coaches feel he wrote what others thought but wouldn’t say.

 

            5 – How many coaches who won NCAA D-I Championships are not in the HOF?     

6 - If breaking NCAA rules disqualifies a coach from admission, there are a whole lot who ought to be asked to vacate.

            7 - He took a team that was on probation, couldn’t go to the post-season and had started 2-2 and threw out his defensive philosophy.  He changed to a 1-2-2 zone (which he 

      last used in 1972) and won 24 straight to finish 26-2; with a team that had no motivation, nothing meaningful to play for.  That’s coaching!

            8 - He always agreed to share his ideas with colleagues.  He was truly a coach’s coach.  

As much as he won, he was always incredibly nervous before games.  His famous quote was:

“A perfect season would be all practices, no games.”

  

 

            

 

A Question for the College Basketball Hall of Fame

Thursday, April 11th, 2013

In other Halls of Fame, in order for a coach to be inducted, I believe a coach needs to have been retired for a period of time.  Yet in college hoops, not only is there no mandatory waiting period, they seem to find it necessary to induct active coaches.  I’ve never understood why there is such a hurry to anoint coaches with such a distinction so early.  Each of the leaders who are being selected will be certainly be chosen when their careers have come to a close.  Unless the electors worry a coach is going to die “on the bench” as so many coaches claim they’re going to do because of their love of the profession or, in some instances, because (admittedly) coaching is all they know how to do.

With all the scandals we’ve been made privy to, a wiser choice would seem to be to wait so as not to remove someone who does something illegal, unethical or worse while he or she is still an active coaching member.  By no means is this blog aimed at Rick Pitino who, coincidentally, was inducted in the 2013 class.  Both Jim Boeheim and Jim Calhoun were inducted while they were active coaches (Boeheim still is - and nearly tacked on another national championship to his lengthy resume).

My point is, why take away a spot on the ballot from an “old-timer” (for lack of a better term) or detract from the retired coach who’s entering?  For the older coach it’s a chance to reminisce some and thank others who also may be later on in years.  Right now, Pitino has to try not to forget his past teams while, naturally, the guys who just gave Louisville another banner are those who are freshest on his mind.  Besides, of his recent honors, wouldn’t it stand to reason that winning a national championship (or even a Final Four appearance had the Cards not won it), having a horse qualify to run in the Kentucky Derby and getting selected in the Hall of Fame have to rank 1,2,3 - in that order?  For someone to say no, they must really love horses.

Obviously, Rick Pitino (and Jim Boeheim and Jim Calhoun) would have been voted into the Hall following their retirement.  Maybe even at a time they’d appreciate it more or at a time the spotlight had gone away for a while, so having it return would have made it a sweeter tribute.  If there was anything any coach could do in between retirement and getting selected that would preclude him or her from induction, it would have to be some heinous crime.  The way things are run now, the title would have to be vacated, bringing additional shame on the coach and the sport.

There should be a mandatory 3-5 year waiting period for coaches to get elected in the Hall of Fame (of course with exceptions for catastrophies, e.g. Jim Valvano).  The Hall needs to show some of what coaches continually preach:

“Patience!”

Life Lessons Can Be Found at Sports Illustrated

Monday, April 8th, 2013

Most people, myself included, read Sports Illustrated for the articles.  At least until the swimsuit edition arrives.  But other than that issue, pictures are secondary (after the first few pages) to the written word.  The last page has become an audition to see which writer comes as close in popularity to the readers as Rick Reilly.  It might be a stretch to compare him to John Wooden but there seems to be no outright favorite yet even though there have been several very good columns.  It seems that there are many Gene Bartows, Gary Cunninghams, Walt Hazzards, Jim Harricks, Steve Lavins and Ben Howlands (most of whom were outstanding coaches) at SI but no one like Coach Wooden.  For my money, there hasn’t even been a Larry Brown yet.

When SI first asked its readers which of a list of sports, other than football, basketball, baseball and possibly a couple others that currently escape my mind (which shows my particular tastes), they had an interest in, e.g. tennis, golf, auto racing, etc. my choices came down to tennis and golf.  It was a tough choice and if I were younger - and still playing tennis - that would have been what I’d have selected.  Since my back issues eliminated playing tennis about a decade ago, I chose golf.  Now I get additional articles on the sport as well as special extra editions.  A good friend of mine is a scratch (or close) golfer so those issues go to him, after I’ve briefly scanned them.

The one on the Masters that just came out intrigued me enough that as I perused it, the article with their panel of (three) experts (and one anonymous pro) caught my eye.  Opinions abound in sports and I’ve found (through experience) it’s always a good idea to hear what others who are deeply involved in a sport or topic think before you start popping off, or even discussing, issues so as not to look foolish.  Although I’ve read some interesting points in the past, little did I think I’d come across as introspective an explanation as Gary Van Sickle’s regarding Rory McElroy’s approach to his profession.  Van Sickle said of the young star:

“He’s not all golf like Tiger was.  Rory is going to take the time to enjoy his life.  He reminds me of Arnold Palmer a little there.  He’ll be streaky great, and he’s got other interests.  He’ll have a better quality of life, and if that means a couple fewer major wins in the long run, that’s all right.”

In addition to expertly defining the differences between the two golfers, the Van Sickle quote speaks volumes to most everybody who has a job.  If you’ve just entered the working world, those are your choices.  How do you approach your profession?  Do you love it so much that it consumes your every waking minute?  In the business world, that type of an employee is called a workaholic.  Those people often find an abundance of material wealth, yet, frequently, there is something missing in their life in another area of it.  In the field of sports, we call them single minded and driven.  Some (most?) people think a person’s life should be balanced.  We all remember the old adage “All work and no play make Jack a dull boy.” 

The times and people (and salaries/purses for sporting events/endorsement deals) have made that quote obsolete.  Now, it’s “get it while you can” and “the window of opportunity is open only so long.”  Maybe not so much in golf where some wise brilliant old golfer had the imagination - or told somebody else - to create a Seniors Tour.  Still, people don’t want to see extraordinary talent not pushed to the ultimate.  Usually parents and agents because 1) nearly all of them weren’t as athletically blessed and 2) they don’t have to do the heavy lifting.

Far too many people have altered the line so that it turned around the original message.  Maybe Rory McElroy has it right but for now it’s become:     

“All work and no play make Jack (or Jill) a champion.”

Does Miami Want to Be THAT Good - Now?

Tuesday, March 19th, 2013

Granted, these are the dog days of the NBA.  There are a few teams that might already be, dare I say, “positioning themselves” for the draft?  Others know there is more ball to be played (and bonus money to be made) once the season ends.  Except for a select few, e.g. the Lakers, many are more concerned with keeping their key guys healthy than trying to influence the postseason match ups.

Enter the Harlem Globetrotters Miami Heat.  The Heat won it all last year (one year too late, some say).  One of the concerns last season was whether the team had a reliable three point shooter to kick it out to after penetration.  So they got . . . the greatest three point marksman of all-time, Ray Allen.  He joined LeBron, D-Wade and Chris Bosh and (most of) the remainder of the team that won it all.  Was that fair?  There’s nothing fair about building a team in the NBA - the better the executives, the more understanding the owner is that money must be spent wisely (but, make no mistake about it, it must be spent), the slicker the people running the organization, the more likely the team will plug the gaps that are holding it back from being mentioned as a club that can compete for a championship - on a nightly basis.

The Miami Heat knew they were going to - as coaches are fond of saying - get everyone’s best shot.  Winning as much as they did during the first part of the year wasn’t surprising.  The “Big Three” had shed whatever it was that could have been on their collective backs their initial season (their first together) and they seemed to be playing looser.  A similar feeling for their coaching staff.

As the season progressed, injuries hit team after team and, as the post-All Star game part of the schedule moved on, the Heat kept adding win after win.  Now, the “streak” became the topic of conversation.  With the NCAA’s March Madness fever grabbing nearly every sports fan, college basketball owns this time of the year.  Spring training has begun, football and its trading deadline occupies some space and the Blackhawks gave hockey enthusiasts something to talk about post-lockout.

Meanwhile, Miami (the pro hoops team, not the college one) almost bored people with its dismantling of opponents - the “contendas” as well as those who show up because league rules dictate they must.  OK, so what about their bitter rival, aka the (aging, but) capable Boston Celtics?  The arena will always be rockin’ when the Heat show up regardless of the circumstances.  Except that there would be no Rajon Rondo (even though the W-L results have yet to be affected by the little dynamo’s absence) and no KG.  What Kevin Garnett gives the Celts, beyond points and rebounds, is a nastiness seldom seen in any sport.  Or pretty much in any walk of life.  You’ve heard how people say, “If I were in a war, the guy I’d like to have in my foxhole is Kevin Garnett?”  Even pacifists feel that way about KG.

So when it was announced that Garnett wouldn’t be available, green flags were about to be flown at half staff.  Only this is Boston, damn it!  Beantowners don’t surrender to anybody!  Somebody would come through with a wicked good game.  This time that somebody was Jeff Green who had a personal high (as well as a high for most NBA players) of 43.  The Men in Green were often up double digits and led for the entire game.  Or so it seemed.  Until LeBron hit the game winner after the Heat finally tied it.

Had the Heat been toying with them?  To many it might now seem so after watching that game last night, the Heat’s 23rd victory in a row.  A person I was with suggested Miami actually would like to see the streak end so they could simply worry about just winning the playoffs.  The pressure of back-to-back will be enough of a burden.  A winning streak would only be an albatross for the last season’s champs.

Some may wonder if the late, and fiercely competitive, owner of the Raiders, Al Davis, wouldn’t back off (between now and the end of the regular season) his famous saying:

“Just win, baby!”

A Testimonial for 3-Day Detox

Monday, March 11th, 2013

DON’T DO IT!

Seriously, although going through three days of detox with my wife was brutal, I did manage to lose eight pounds.  While there are more that need to go, I guarantee they won’t be lost via detox.  The only reason I finished this ordeal was because of my wife.  First of all, I promised her I’d join her in this tomfoolery.  Next, Jane was the one who made all those nasty smoothies.  After the first one of those dreadful things, I wouldn’t have been able to justify spending the time it took chopping, slicing, dicing and blending the fruits, vegetables and flax seed - and, I’m sure, whatever other foul ingredient the recipe calls for.  I might have been able to brew the green tea but as I mentioned in Saturday’s blog, I don’t like tea.  In any color.  The only T I like is the kind that’s called against the opposing team.  And only then if we have a good free throw shooter.

As far as soaking in a bath for 30 minutes with 2 1/2 cups of Epson salt (and 10 drops of lavender), c’mon.  2 1/2 cups of Epson salt!  I thought I was in Utah.  They (whoever “they” is) say it’s a good idea to read, that it relaxes you. One admission: I haven’t taken a bath since my little duckie drowned.  Maybe I forgot the technique, but I gave the reading idea a try.  I just can’t figure how to read and not get the magazine wet.  By the end of the half hour, the magazine was as wrinkled as I was.

I did lose significant weight but there have got to be more pleasant methods.  With the three-day detox program, you’re supposed to feel more rested and energized.  Maybe all my medical problems, e.g. multiple surgeries and the subsequent pain, made me a bad candidate for the three-day plan.

The best thing, however, is if you listen really hard, you can hear a large woman with an operatic voice.  Not only has the fat lady sung, she’s taken her bows and left the building. What I’m most grateful for is:

“The next time I get my shoes shined, I won’t have to take the guy’s word for it.”

We Interrupt This Blog . . .

Wednesday, February 27th, 2013

For those of you who read this space yesterday, you’re expecting the second installment.  That was the plan - until, as the saying goes, life got in the way.

After I left the dentist’s office today, I stopped at a Subway on the way home for a sandwich.  Outside the store, which is located about a block away from the junior high, I noticed a shopping cart with a few items in it, one of them a baseball glove.  There was a kid, junior high age, sitting nearby.  He said, “Excuse me, can I have a dollar for . . . ”

“No, sorry,” I cut him off.  It’s not that being panhandled is a pet peeve of mine.  In this case, what bothered me was that this was a predominantly upper class area and a young kid who, upon first blush (which may be somewhat prejudiced), looked anything like a person who needed to beg.  I remember thinking, “Now!  At your age?  This is the career choice you’ve selected?  Sorry, no.”

I went inside, ordered my sandwich and didn’t think any more of that initial scene - until another, older kid showed up and lurked in the doorway.  The young lady working at Subway recognized this apparent trouble maker and told him to go.  He walked past the store, giving her the one finger salute, followed by, you guessed it, my little friend and another little lost sheep who hooked up with the pair.  Not surprisingly, the trio returned, led by the obnoxious older boy.  As soon as I saw them, I sensed the situation was going to escalate, so I called 911.  He burst into the store and began dog-cussing the owner, dropping senseless racial epithets.  Although he was no farther than ten feet away from me, he had no idea I was explaining what was happening to the 911 operator.  It rather evident that this youngster was under the influence of something, calling the Middle Eastern owner the n-word, accompanied by f-bombs and other slang.  When the owner raised his voice and demanded the wannabe gangsta leave, the kid picked up a chair and hurled it at the middle-aged man.

The action did no harm, except for enraging the owner who chased after the youngster.  As we all learned long ago, when people are attacked, they make one of two choices: fight or flight.  Cowards, such as the one in this story, choose the latter.  When he got just outside the door, he collided with one of his smaller buddies who must have thought his man was going to choose the former.  The two collided, the owner caught up and fists were flying.  They weren’t hitting anybody, just flying.  Finally, the kids took off as I gave the play-by-play to the woman on the other end of my phone.  Evidently, she was passing along the info because she said to me, “OK, I think the officers have them against the wall near the junior high.”  Some criminals.

I went to the owner who, by now was on the phone to a friend (or relative or lawyer), explained I had called 911 and the kids had been apprehended.  He thanked me as I was getting a refill of my Diet Coke.  Naturally, while all this was transpiring (and I was talking to the operator), I never stopped eating my 6″ tuna and provolone on wheat (with avocado - my new health kick).  My curiosity got the better of me so, rather than drive home, I went out of the parking lot in the opposite direction.  Fresno’s Finest must be more efficient than most departments because as I pulled out heading south, I noticed a couple patrol cars headed the other way.  I U-turned at the light and returned to give my “deposition.”

During the entire experience, my mind kept returning to the same topic:

“Where are the parents and what are they like?”