Time to fix the ACC Tournament: One proposal

After a lackluster first round at the ACC tournament, I heard some broadcasters say that Friday’s quarterfinals felt like the real start of the tournament.

Maybe it should be, at least in terms of games at one site.

The lack of enthusiasm for the first-round games was obvious on so many levels. There seemed to be more empty seats than fans. There were afternoon-session tickets available on StubHub for $1.99 and evening- session tickets went for $4 on StubHub.

The play matched the lack of enthusiasm and the lack of atmosphere that was common for years during the first round of the ACC Tournament. None of the games were particularly well played and none were very entertaining except to possibly the four fan bases that were happy to see their team move on to the quarterfinals.

Here’s an idea that I’m quite sure the ACC never would consider: Have those first-round games played at the home sites of the higher-seeded teams Tuesday. I guarantee that the combined attendance for those four games would be more than the combined attendance for the two Thursday sessions.

If that is done, the quarterfinal winners no longer have to play four consecutive days should they make the championship game. And, by doing that, you can reseed so that the No. 1 seed plays the lowest seed surviving the first round, the No. 2 seed plays the second-lowest seed among the first-round winners and so on.

The way it’s done now, if there is an upset after the first Thursday game, the regular-season champion doesn’t play the lowest-seeded remaining team in its first game.

This also would allow the full book of ACC Tournament tickets to be sold for a lower price that’s a little more reasonable. You know that fans of the top four seeded teams weren’t thrilled that they had to pay for four Thursday games that they probably cared little about.

Certainly the fact that the tournament was in Atlanta and not in Greensboro where it’s supposed to be is a factor in low Thursday attendance. But the apathy of fans of the top-four seeds had to be a factor as well.

Are UNC and Duke fans saving their money for first- and second-round NCAA tournament tickets and the short trip Greensboro next weekend? Quite possible.

As I blogged two years ago, I think that the ACC Tournament has lost so much luster that I wonder if it’s really needed any more. A writer unearthed that blog opinion last year and I was quoted in an A1 News & Observer article.

We know it’s not going to go away, but reasonable solutions have to be found when you see attendance so low. Even when it was at Greensboro last season, the Greensboro Coliseum wasn’t full for the UNC-Duke championship game. There's no real solution for that and you have to blame the economy, I suppose.

The big tournament that starts next week has simply taken on so much more interest when, in many cases, winning the tournament this week isn’t needed to get there. The teams that need to win the ACC Tournament to make it to the NCAA tournament have very little chance, particularly when it involves winning four games in four days.

Yes, Connecticut did win five games in five days to win the 2011 Big East Tournament, but that is very much the exception.

Give the lower eight seeds a day of rest and give seeds 5-9 a Tuesday home game and they at least have a slightly better chance of a miracle run.

Having said all of this, I realize that the ACC or the schools never are going to go for it. But I can always hope.

Arc madness

The old American Basketball Association brought a lot of flair and some interesting characters before it finally merged with the NBA. But I wish that the one lasting impact it's had on basketball never entered the game: the 3-point field goal.

I've never liked the 3-pointer for many reasons.

Before the 3-pointer, you'd never have four offensive players 20 feet away from the basket at the same time. You'd rarely have a player drive and pass back out for a long shot. Shot selection was better and, in my opinion, the offenses were much more interesting to watch and involved a lot better ball movement.

If your team works for a good shots, it could still fall behind if the opponent is successful at jacking up long-range shots.

Whenever Carolina seems to depend too heavily on the 3-pointer, I've hated it. As Roy Williams sometimes says, it can be fool's gold. It's also too easy to be inconsistent. Give me a solid inside game any day. With the exception of 3-point plays, you only are going to get 2 points. But you don't have to worry about slumps nearly as much.

If Carolina ran a system like Duke, I think I would lose the few remaining hairs on my head. The Blue Devils thrive when they are making the 3 and struggle when they can't find the range. Many times, you need to only look at the number of 3-pointers Duke made to predict whether it won a game.

Statistics prove this. This season, Duke is 20-2 when it makes 7 or more 3-pointers but only 6-3 when it hits 6 or fewer.

A big reason that the Tar Heels crushed Duke in an 88-70 win was simple: It made only 6 3-pointers. That isn't many considering that the Blue Devils' offense is predicated on making the 3-pointer and they can't match UNC's inside game (Duke made 14 in its win at UNC in February.) The Blue Devils also made only 6 3-pointers in a loss at Temple.

Duke can win with very few 3-pointers, but not often. It beat Maryland with only 3 made 3-pointers. But the results were quite contrasting with the same number of 3s at Ohio State -- a blowout loss.

Another reason for me to hate the 3-pointer is that Carolina traditionally isn't that good at defending the perimeter.

This season, UNC is 3-3 when it gives up at least 10 3-pointers but is 24-1 when it gives up 9 or fewer. The only game in which Heels defended the perimeter well and still lost was at Kentucky when the Wildcats made only 3 3-pointers in a 73-72 victory. UNC had a season-high tying 11 3s in that loss.

UNC gave up 13 3s in a loss to UNLV and 12 in a blowout defeat at Florida State. The Heels managed victories despite giving up more than 10 3-pointers against Virginia Tech (13), Tennessee State (11) and Monmouth (11.)

My disdain for 3-pointers certainly hasn't been helped by the 1,000+ replays of a certain buzzer-beating shot by Austin Rivers in February.

I know that the 3-pointer is too popular to be taken away from the game. But I'd love to see what the game would be like without it.