Skip to content

How can we make Fantasy Football better?

← Fantasy Football

Schedule/Scoring Formats - 'Doubleheaders vs league score median'.

Each week, the median fantasy points of all teams in the league is calculated by taking the middle number in a sorted list of scores of each team. Each team would get a win if they beat the league median and a loss if they lose to it.

4th ranked

We're glad you're here

Please sign in to leave feedback
Signed in as (Sign out)
Close
Close

We’ll send you updates on this idea

Product Support shared this idea  ·   ·  Report…  ·  Admin →
Comments are closed An error occurred while saving the comment
  • Wayne Wissinger commented  ·   ·  Report

    Jeff is correct. Going to another web site to print a viable schedule, then using the Edit Schedule process is a waste of time. In 2 division, 10 team leagues, the default schedule should schedule each team in your division twice and each team in the other division once (13 games), then start week playoffs week 14.

  • Steve Huslig commented  ·   ·  Report

    the commish in the league has total control over the schedule. They can set the schedule where the divisions play each other twice. The commish needs to learn how to use the Edit Schedule option in commish tools.

  • Stephen Staple commented  ·   ·  Report

    I agree that head-to-head matchups are a terrible way to create standings. I would like to see a system in which half of the league gets a win and half gets a loss each week. Top 5 scorers receive a W, bottom 5 receive an L (10 team league). Fairest, simplest method.

  • Smitty commented  ·   ·  Report

    @Will The comparison doesn't quite transfer to the fantasy world. In a real football game your players are matched up physically against other football players. You couldn't actually say, "we would have beat 23 other teams this week but we still got a loss." Because you can't guarantee that you would score the same amount of points against their physical defenses.

    You can say that in the fantasy world because it's all statistics based on what happens in the real world (your team would have scored the same amount of points no matter who you played head-to-head). We have control over how we can keep score, and how we can make it more fair. I'd really like the option to do so! :)

  • Will commented  ·   ·  Report

    That reminds me of a couple weeks ago when the Colts lost 34-51 to the Steelers while putting up the 6th highest score that week. They went crying to Roger Goodell, saying "It's just not fair - we would have beat 23 other teams this week but we still got a loss - that's not right!" Goodell said "You make such a convincing point! You shouldn't get a loss just because you lost. You tried soooo hard! Here's an extra win because you did such a good job!!!!!"

  • Corey Barnofsky commented  ·   ·  Report

    I came to this section of the site just to mention this idea. I think its a very telling stat that rewards points, consistency, and removes the H2H matchup luck factor. Whenever I see this stat on the Automated Insights game recap thing I always seem to think it correlates with how good that team actually is. Please please please make this an option, my 14-team league that has been running for a decade would switch over in a heartbeat.

  • Jeremy Nadke commented  ·   ·  Report

    More options for league formats is always better.

  • Tyler Ingram commented  ·   ·  Report

    This is a great idea. I hate having a loss when I'm the second highest scoring team but just happen to play the first highest scoring.

  • Big Al commented  ·   ·  Report

    Instead of each team playing every team each week, why not just have a 13 week season for an example, and the top point scoring teams after the regular season then move on to the playoffs, playoff seeding based on total points scored. This is a great thread. I'm 1-7 in a league. Every week I've scored more points than 8 other teams in a 12 team league, and have a 1-7 record to show for it.

  • Big Al commented  ·   ·  Report

    Agree, Im tired of being the points against king

  • Smitty commented  ·   ·  Report

    @Will totally agree, I just think it's a nice option. My favorite league is a head-to-head keeper league, and I personally head-to-head is the only way to play in keeper leagues!

    There is a complete "fairness" aspect to all-play that other league types don't have. For instance, the 59-29 person is actually 3-5 in our league right now, sitting in 9th place. They are 1st in all-play, and 9th in head-to-head. Normally this person would be complaining about how much harder their schedule is (rightfully so). But, this year there are no complaints from anyone, it's nice!

  • Will commented  ·   ·  Report

    Fair enough - I was wrong. I still think it will pretty much approximate total points over a long enough period of time ... but it does reward consistency. Here's my league:

    Record; Points; AllPlay
    6-2-0, 1; 1196.32, 1; 71-17, 1
    5-3-0, 2; 1119.84, 2; 55-33, 2
    4-4-0, 6; 1028.32, 4; 48-40, 3
    5-3-0, 3; 1024.4, 5; 47-41, 4
    4-4-0, 5; 1045.4, 3; 44-44, 5
    2-6-0, 11; 990.44, 6; 43-45, 6
    2-6-0, 12; 965.92, 7; 43-45, 6
    4-4-0, 7; 963.38, 8; 42-46, 8
    5-3-0, 4; 946.9, 9; 36-52, 9
    3-5-0, 10; 940.02, 11; 36-52, 9
    4-4-0, 8; 940.12, 10; 35-53, 11
    4-4-0, 9; 915.64, 12; 28-60, 12

    I personally like head-to-head since this is how sports works - sometimes you lose 42-35, sometimes you win 13-9 - but I see why this could be attractive to people.

  • Smitty commented  ·   ·  Report

    Well, as promised I'm posting my current league standings with this format.

    1. 59-29-0, Total Points: 913.3
    2. 52-36-0, Total Points: 873.78
    3. 51-37-0, Total Points: 934.68
    4. 50-38-0, Total Points: 947.58
    5. 48-40-0, Total Points: 886.72
    6. 48-40-0, Total Points: 871.88
    7. 45-43-0, Total Points: 887.42
    8. 44-44-0, Total Points: 891.08
    9. 40-48-0, Total Points: 818.72
    10. 34-54-0, Total Points: 774.28
    11. 33-55-0, Total Points: 771.96
    12. 24-64-0, Total Points: 712.82

    Similar as before. The overall top scorer is no longer #1, they are 4th overall. The person in 8th points wise is only 25 pts behind #1, record wise, they're 8th! On a side note, I'm 9th, and I'm tired of Calvin Johnson being hurt!

  • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Report

    Two games per week reduces the problem, but doesn't solve it.
    The "all-play" option is better.
    Have every team play every other team every week.

  • Tyler Nofziger commented  ·   ·  Report

    I would DEFINITELY prefer an option to go against the league average over "playing everyone".

    I don't know why you couldn't add both options though for commissioners to chose from. But if you are only adding one, please add the:

    2 wins (or losses) total for the week
    1 win for H2H to keep it exciting and promote rivalries
    1 win for beating the league average to lesson the depression from scoring the 2nd highest score of the week but still losing to the guy with 200 points

  • Tyler Nofziger commented  ·   ·  Report

    I'm in an APEX fantasy league ran on My Fantasy League and we have this option. It's SO MUCH MORE FAIR and I love it. I can't believe Yahoo hasn't added this yet.

  • Jessica Nofziger commented  ·   ·  Report

    This has to be done. My other leagues have this and Yahoo is starting to seem like a dinosaur for not having this as an option.

  • Tyler Nofziger commented  ·   ·  Report

    This could probably be coded in 10 minutes and wouldn't negatively impact anyone at all.

  • Tyler Nofziger commented  ·   ·  Report

    Many other websites offer this now. I'll probably move my leagues elsewhere if Yahoo doesn't start offering this as an option.

    1 game head to head
    1 game against the league average

  • Tyler Nofziger commented  ·   ·  Report

    This is an absolute MUST ADD. There's no reason NOT to add this as any option! My other leagues have this and it's SO much more fair. PLEASE GET THIS DONE YAHOO!!

1 2 … 14 16 18 19 20 21

Fantasy Football: Schedule/Scoring Formats

Categories

Feedback and Knowledge Base

(thinking…)