Badminton How To Play

Looking back at the Albany Great Danes' recent season, I can't help but feel they were inches away from something special. Those quarter scores—21-23, 40-40, 55-61, 82-78—tell a story of a team that fought hard but couldn't quite close when it mattered most. As someone who's followed college basketball for over a decade, I've seen this pattern before. The Great Danes have the foundation; they just need to refine their approach in key areas.

Let's talk about that first quarter deficit. Being down 21-23 might not seem significant, but in my experience, early game struggles often reveal deeper issues. The team's shooting percentage in opening quarters hovered around 38%—that's simply not good enough against America East competition. I'd love to see them come out with more aggressive offensive sets rather than feeling out their opponents. They've got the athletes to push tempo from the opening tip, yet they consistently start games too conservatively. What I'd give to see them take 3-4 more three-point attempts in those first ten minutes—it would force defenses to respect their range and open driving lanes.

The middle quarters reveal something fascinating—they actually won the second period 19-17 and trailed by just six entering the fourth. This tells me their halftime adjustments are working, but their bench depth might be lacking. I noticed their scoring drops noticeably when starters get their first rest around the 12-minute mark. Having studied their roster construction, I believe they need at least two more reliable scorers off the bench. The current rotation only goes about seven deep in meaningful minutes, and in today's college game, that's just not sufficient for maintaining intensity through the full forty minutes.

Now, about that final push from 55-61 to 82-78—that's where I saw real promise. The team showed tremendous heart in closing games, but they relied too heavily on individual heroics rather than systematic execution. Their crunch-time offense often devolved into isolation plays instead of running their sets through to completion. From my perspective, they need to develop 2-3 go-to plays for tight situations—maybe a high ball screen with their point guard and center, or a corner flare screen for their best shooter. These moments separate good teams from great ones, and with some focused practice, Albany could turn several of those close losses into wins.

Defensively, there's work to do as well. Giving up 78 points in a college game isn't terrible, but when you examine the film, you'll notice they surrendered too many open looks from beyond the arc. I counted at least 12 uncontested three-point attempts in their final five games—that's simply unacceptable at this level. Their help defense tends to overcommit on drives, leaving shooters wide open. A simple adjustment would be to teach their big men to stay home more often rather than aggressively helping on every penetration.

What excites me most is their potential. With the core group returning next season, plus what I hear is a strong recruiting class coming in, the pieces are there for a breakthrough. They need to focus on conditioning—I'd estimate their fourth-quarter fatigue led to at least 4-5 late-game turnovers per contest—and develop more offensive creativity. But mark my words: if they can fix these issues, we could be looking at a team that not only improves their record but makes some noise in the conference tournament. The foundation is solid; now it's about building upon it with smarter strategies and sharper execution when games are on the line.