Also, the NFL uses the won-lost-tied percentage because of the fact that all teams may not play the same amount of games against each other. This is probably the case for alot of the FF leagues since many only play a 13 game schedule, so FF may want to change how they apply head-to-head. Just my opinion, nothing more.

The bottom line is that Fleaflicker does not recognize one division leagues as such. They consider these to have NO DIVISIONS. So in their mind if you have one division, then you have no divisions, and therefore the normal division tiebreakers aren't used. The normal division tiebreaker would be head to head percentage, but FF requires one team TO SWEEP all of the other teams in the tie. ILLOGICAL. And the admin at FF is too stubborn/lazy to realize this and correct it.

Your leagues are private. The Commish can easily change playoff seedings if your league wishes to use different tiebreakers. You, your leagues, and your league Commishes, are "too stubborn/lazy to realize this and correct it".

You can't just change the tiebreakers at the end of the season.

Joe, I understand your frustration, but I think you are reading their comments wrong. FF lets leagues setup tiebreakers in any order they want. It does not follow the NFL tiebreaker order, just the process of how it goes through the tiebreakers as I indicated above. Your league's first tiebreaker is best head-to-head record, which FF states has to be a sweep. I agree that percentage would be better, but that's not how FF set it up. You can argue until you are blue in the face about what it should be, but bottom line is they indicate that it has to be a sweep. So it is what it is. On their comment about not having the division tiebreaker, they are referring to Best Division Record (Same Division Only) tiebreaker rule which your league does not have. This makes sense since your division record would be the same as your league record. I think FF is right in this case only because they do state how they apply the head-to-head tiebreaker. In my league I use Most Average Points as the 1st tiebreaker which usually eliminates having to go any further, but this year we did actually have to go to the 2nd tiebreaker. Quite a surprise. I hope this helps.

Finally someone who understands logic. Yes, I agree with you 100%, but my issue is that they don't specify that it must be a sweep (unless you hold your mouse over the tiebreaker rule and a pop-up comes up, most miniscule thing ever), and naming the tiebreaker "head-to-head record" when it is not in fact head to head record is wrong. Secondly, in their explanation, they claim to follow the NFL tiebreaker rules, which again they do not as the NFL uses head-to-head percentage for the wildcard.

Yeah, I've learned over the years to mouse over things as they do a lot of pop-ups. Which is cool because that allows them to add lots of info. You're right about the name, they should call this rule Head-to-Head Sweep instead of Head-to-Head Record.

Your response to use the sweep in incorrect; the sweep rule is not used until after, read below. I have copied from the NFL rules below.

This situation is about a tie breaker for Wild Card, with 3 or more teams. And in Rule #1 below it says to 'Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2'. (Not until Step 2 is the sweep rule used). The Division tie breaker it says to use is copied below also. That clearly says to use 'Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs).' So the first rule in 3 or more tied for Wild Card is to use the Division tie breaker....which says to use head to head percentage of win-loss-tie. So therefore, in this situation, we have four teams; two have a 2-1 (.666) record head to head and the other two have a 1-2 (.333) record head to head. By rule below, the tie is broken using: Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs). So this would be Groundhogs and Jomama with the 2 best head to head records..

This is very clear to understand and logical also.

Please make the changes according to the rules that you follow, which are the NFLs, below.

Thank you!

TO BREAK A TIE FOR THE WILD-CARD TEAM

Three or More Clubs

(Note: If two clubs remain tied after third or other clubs are eliminated, tie breaker reverts to step 1 of applicable two-club format.)

1. Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. The original seeding within a division upon application of the division tie breaker remains the same for all subsequent applications of the procedure that are necessary to identify the two Wild-Card participants.

2. Head-to-head sweep. (Applicable only if one club has defeated each of the others or if one club has lost to each of the others.)

TO BREAK A TIE WITHIN A DIVISION

Three or More Clubs

(Note: If two clubs remain tied after third or other clubs are eliminated during any step, tie breaker reverts to step 1 of the two-club format).

1. Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs).

The critical piece you are missing is that the tie-breaker Rule #1 for 3 or more clubs is to indeed use the WIN-LOSS-TIED PERCENTAGE!! PERCENTAGE. So that is what we should be doing. Compare the W-L-T PERCENTAGE of these 4 teams with the 6-7 record. The two teams with 2-1 records, have the best head to head. You keep on saying one team has to SWEEP! That is used as rule #2....which we never need to get to, since rule #1 solves the tie-breaker.

What is so difficult to understand??

The explanation in the given e-mail was correct. You don't use the wildcard tiebreaker of H2H if 2+ teams are tied until the division tiebreaker is used. So in the AFC North if the Ravens and Steelers are 9-7 and the Bengals won the division at 9-7 and the Dolphins are also 9-7, it doesn't matter if the Steelers beat the Dolphins head to head in their only meeting this year if the Ravens have a better division record. The Ravens would advance over the Steelers with a better division record and then they would go up against the Dolphins and see if head to head applied, if not the next tiebreaker would be used.

OMG! Below is what the NFL rules state for 3 or more clubs under Wild Card tie breaker:

Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2.

The highest ranked club in our ONE division is 10-3. That statement above says to use the Div tie breaker to eliminate ALL BUT THE HIGHEST RANKED CLUB IN EACH DIVISION. And that's what we're doing. So we're not dealing with the highest ranked team; we're trying to eliminate 2 of the 4 teams that are all 6-7....and it says right above to use the DIVISION TIE BREAKER.....and THAT says to use "Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs)".

(Your Ravens example above is not applicable since these 4 teams are all not near the highest ranked team in the division)

I don't know who you are, but you need to get someone else at FF to read this and understand it correctly. You are making an easy rule very complicated.

Common sense would tell you that a team with a 2-1 head to head record would get the nod over another team with a 1-2 head to head record.

If head to head can't be used (if there is no sweep with all the teams, which is the case in your scenario) the next tiebreaker is used to whittle down the teams and then you go back to the top to break the tie if H2H can be used. In your case, it was used correctly.

Why do you keep thinking head to head percentage can't be used?? This is a Wild Card tie breaker with 4 teams. The first rule for that says to use the Div tie-breaker....which says to use head to head percentage.

Why do you say head to head can't be used?????????

I will break it down exactly in Riding Club:

You have four 6-7 teams vying for 2 spots.

Your rules are:

Power & Playoff Rank Tiebreakers:

Best head-to-head record

Most average points/game

Hardest schedule (record)

Hardest schedule (points)

You don't even have division tiebreaker as a tiebreaker there and have not because the league consists of no divisions. You have the choice to use division tiebreaker as a tiebreaker if you have divisions -- your league does not so the NFL rule you are trying to apply is not even applicable.

Bomb, Ground, Jo, Owns are all tied at 6-7.

Bomb did not sweep any teams or get swept. Ground did not sweep any teams or get swept. Jo did not sweep any teams or get swept. Owns did not sweep any teams or get swept.

Use the next tiebreaker... It is Most Average Points (better known as PF)... Out of the four teams, Bomb Squad has the Most Points at 1,338 so they enter the playoffs as your best seed at 6-7.

Now you have three teams left - Ground, Jo and Owns...

Ground is the only team there to sweep all teams, so they enter the playoffs as the last seed: fleaflicker.com

It was broken correctly. Head-to-Head is in fact used for your last seed.

Obviously we have one division for the league! How can a league have NO divisions? By default a league has to have at least one division; there is no other option! One or more divisions goes without saying.

Still the #1 rule under 'Wild Card, 3 or more clubs tie breaker' is to "apply the division tie breaker"! Saying we don't have any divisions is silly. You seem to want to blow right past that first rule, and go to the second rule about head to head sweeps.

Enough of FF. We'll go to yahoo next season.

I have been reading all of these complaints in order to try to understand how tie-breakers are decided, and I am having a hard time understanding all of this, but I want to say that I AM LOSING THREE GOOD FANTASY PLAYERS THAT I RECRUITED TO FLEAFLICKER FROM YAHOO THIS SEASON -- JUST BECAUSE OF THE TIE-BREAKER RULES (IT IS A MONEY LEAGUE). SO SOMETHING MUST BE WRONG!

I want to also comment on the JHickey's post above about having one division though. The word "division" means that something is divided into smaller parts, so Flea's comment about there being NO divisions does make sense in that respect, rather than calling it one division. I guess grammatically ONE DIVISION would be a contradictory term unless you were talking about one OF the multiple divisions. And of course the NFL does have multiple divisions, so it would make sense that their "division" rule would not apply here.

I will go see if that was the case in my leagues because I have no divisions either, so maybe that is why my guys are not happy with our tiebreakers.

hickey..you don't have any divisions.....

koko, you are losing three good fantasy players because they are pissed they didn't make the playoffs and don't like the tiebreaker rules. It's pretty simple really. How can you not understand:

1) head to head records

2) points?

In fact, SOS should never even come to play. How many times have two teams fighting for the final sport scored the SAME amount of points?

Yeah, they don't understand because in Yahoo ties are broken with total points, which actually makes more sense to me too. Because I have no divisions in my league, all of the teams play each other just once, so the first H2H tiebreaker came down to just the one game where the two tied teams played each other. So I see both sides to that argument -- it IS a H2H league, so a H2H game versus your tied opponent deciding the playoff birth would make sense. But on the other hand, I also see where your 13 weeks of work kind of goes down the drain if making the playoffs really ends up just being based on just that one game that you played versus that tied opponent. It's a hard call, and in my eight years of playing this way, it has never come up before.

An "OXYMORON" -- that is the word I was trying to think of for JHickey. The term "one division" is an oxymoron because the term is in itself contradictory. :).

@michiganact as commish you can choose 1 division when you set up your league, that is what is being referred to. This eliminates the possibility of having a 6-7 team in a crappy division win make the playoffs when an 8-5 team does not because of good teams in their division. If the NFL were one big league without divisions, the playoff tiebreakers should still logically work the same way as they currently do within each individual division.

@ kokopelli the issue at hand isn't what type of tiebreaker is better, it is that fleaflicker bases their rules on NFL rules for tiebreakers, yet they are not following these rules.

and michiganact, when you say:

"It's pretty simple really. How can you not understand:

1) head to head records

2) points?"

This is the whole issue at hand, which is what you are too simple to understand. Head to head record is not being considered, only whether or not one team has a complete sweep of all other tied teams, and then total points. This is not how the playoff tiebreaker in the NFL works.

Exactly. If this is all over a ridiculous technicality that somehow a box wasn't checked that designated having ONE DIVISION, that's pathetic. (And FF won't allow commish settings access to view this at this point in the season). So when a league decides to use ONE DIVISION, does that need to be designated somewhere, as if that's not obvious to everyone? FF should be set up so that if MULTIPLE divisions aren't setup at the start of the season, then by default your league is understood to have ONE DIVISION, and none of this BS would be taking place! Make the default be ONE DIVISION, and make it an option to have a ZERO DIVISION league...which yes sounds and is very stupid. (New league commish: Ummm yes we want to set up a new fantasy league with 12 teams, but with zero divisions. Can we do that? Says FF admin: sure we specialize if zero division fantasy leagues!)

(I've lost count of the number of times I've written to FF Admin on suggestions to their site....EASY CHANGES mind you....and they've completely agreed, yet NONE have ever been implemented).

There is no such thing as having NO DIVISIONS. So FF needs to have a default as stated above. Are you listening FF?? (Yes of course we're listening, thanks for the great suggestion, we agree and will implement this as soon as possible!!)

As stated above, the #1 rule in a WC tiebreaker is to use the division tiebreaker, which says to use "Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs"....unless of course you are playing in a FF league that believe it or not, doesn't even have any divisions!! Where else but the world of flea flicker can a league be run that is considered to have NO DIVISIONS!!??

ARARARARGGGHHHHH!!!!

i'm not sure why you guys are crying.....you can edit your playoff seedings. Just edit it and stop blaming FleaFlicker.

It makes PERFECT sense, if someone didn't sweep, nobody has the upperhand. Team A beat Team b who beat Team C who beat Team D who beat team A. You can't let ANYONE in. Because of H2H. If Team A beat B and C but lost to D, you can't have them going over D. D BEAT THEM. Even if D lost to B and C. Makes total sense, not sure why this is an issue.

@Mike

how would a 6-7 team make the playoffs and not a 8-5 team for a wildcard? That makes no sense, unless the 6-7 team won their division. IF that's the case, I'm all for that. If you aren't then you haven't watched the NFL.

@ michigan if it makes total sense than why does the NFL not follow those rules...it's total head to head record for the NFL tiebreaker not sweep. if you don't know that then you haven't watched the NFL.

in response to your first post^^

don't try to argue if you don't even know the rules

don't argue if you think fantasy football should mirror NFL.

the logic behind tiebreaker rules shouldn't change in any type of competition, whether it's the NFL, fantasy football, or any other situation where a tiebreaker is necessary so your argument makes no sense. You're fighting a losing battle here.

Fleaflicker claims they use the same system as the NFL, but their logic behind the whole "you only have one division so division tiebreakers don't apply" is absurd. When i set up my league, I picked one division and even chose a name for that division. I didn't choose "No Divisions" as fleaflicker is claiming

If you really want to mirror the NFL, we should be able to switch the guys in our lineup during the game when someone gets hurt! Peterson went down in the very beginning of the game -- I didn't have him, but when that happens we should have the option of replacing him with someone on our bench!!!!!

Kokopelli go home you're drunk

I also think the tie breaker system at Fleaflicker is broken, the guys running the site have a fundamental misunderstanding of how tiebreakers really work. And yes you can't have NO Divisions, you have either 1 Division or several. You can't have 0 divisions that's unpossible (just like that last word).

In our league we had an issue with our playoff seeding which we manually corrected and after reading this thread I think I know why. We had a 3 way tie for first place in one of our 3 divisions, but our tie breakers were set as, Best Head To Head record, Points for, Best Divisional Record. To me and everyone else in our league best head to head record should have produced a clear winner. They had all played each other the same amount of times and there was clearly one team who had won more games against the other two. Yet because they didn't win all the games that tie breaker rule was ignored and the tie was broken with Points for.

That's just absurd. Obviously we should have set the Best division record as our 1st or 2nd tie breaker had we wanted flea to produce the right results. And even then it probably would have screwed up the rankings for someone else. It's absurd, and the system needs an overhaul, because it just doesn't work.

Thank you! Your case is even more pronounced then ours as you do have multiple divisions, but since the tie is within 1 division it has the same issue as in our league. Directly from NFL.com, the tiebreaker within a division for H2H is best win-loss-tie percentage, not whether one team sweeps the others.

@ Gaald did you write to FF admin to try and get an explanation? I'd be very interested to see how they explain this one since even they would have to admit that you really DID have a league with divisions. Our league apparently operated with zero divisions this season!!!

How will they explain that they don't really know how head to head works?

No I didn't because it's obvious from this thread that in order for their system to work we would have had to set the Division tie breaker up first or second. Instead of what we did, which was third. That is the tie breaker which would have fixed your issue as well, except somehow they don't think one division is a division, WHICH IS STUPID!

It is also stupid that Head to Head doesn't work properly either. You don't need one team to sweep all of the head to head matchups, especially if they all played the same amount of games vs each other within the tie break situation. The person with the most wins should win the tie breaker, and than you can sort out the remainder. Plain and simple.

Like I said before Fleaflicker needs to redo their tiebreaker rules, they are garbage and make very little sense as is. But I won't be holding my breath. We're talking about a site that can't find the time to place a Team Victory, AKA Coaches win, stat as one of the pts options for pools, and our league as well as a few others have been asking for it for like 5 years or more now. Pathetic.

So why do you play Fleaflicker if you hate it so much? Go elsewhere! I'm done with this thread!

Not that you'll read this, seeing as you are done with this thread. I did come off a little harsh yesterday. Fleaflicker does do a lot right. One of the reasons we came here was that the system was pretty damned flexible, not perfect for our league, but we've managed over the years in the hopes we would eventually get the added stuff our league needed. But you get what you pay for I guess.

It's frustrating when your league is told they will look into adding a simple stat, and year after year they do nothing about it. Instead the site gets crappy useless features like little pics beside your names or some other fluff that is totally useless and does nothing to improve the actual flexibility of the stats system. You know the most important part of the site and the one thing makes a fantasy site great.

All that time spent on an app that was pretty unstable, and isn't even supported any longer, now the site gets yet another cosmetic overhaul in the hopes people will pay to get rid of the ads. Just how many people do they think they'll be able to keep, never mind bother to pay for the site, if year after year the things leagues want are overlooked for cosmetic changes that do nothing for the system that attracts everyone in the first place.

We are constantly enhancing the site with feature enhancements and requests that you guys put on our agenda and in mind. We get hundreds per month and do our best to implement what we think our users will appreciate/use the most and put those into action that are the most user friendly to make the site run the best.

We are very dedicated to improving the site based on your feedback and do take everything into account to give you the best fantasy experience on the web. We thank you for playing here.

Except for a Team Victory or Coaches win stat. Something a few of us have been asking for, for well over 5 years now. Apparently that's just impossible. Also more tie break options, ones that actually make sense that some leagues might actually want to use. Or injury status tracking that doesn't jump around every hour making the IR system damn near useless for most leagues.

Just to name a few.

or a league commish could just set the playoff themselves...don't see what the problem is. Don't blame the site for something you can fix yourself. If your league blatantly said you would be using head to head percentage, then fix it.

We did, but it appears some weren't so lucky and got caught off guard. Besides the point of using the site is that it does most if not all of the administration of the league for you. I'm lucky, our league is made up of friends and if something goes wrong we all trust that the commish is doing what's best for the league.

That's not the case for everyone, and when things go wrong it can ruin the league.

Head-to-head tiebreakers are dumb anyway. In real life they are excellent. But in fantasy we aren't actually playing defense against one another. We're just arbitrarily matched up against this team and that team at different times.

What ought to be used, in every fantasy league, is total points. That's the truer measure of who the better team was. We don't use it as the means of deciding the standings because of the week-to-week excitement the head-to-head format generates. But total points can at least be the first tiebreaker.

And add all the above confusion to my list of reasons for hating head-to-head as a fantasy tiebreaker. Total points, for fantasy, is superior.

Not to mention that total points as the first tiebreaker is generally a lot easier for everyone to follow along with. All the teams' points are always right there in the standings. Everyone is always on top of the tiebreaker that way.

I highly recommend you do whatever it takes to get your leagues to stop blindly trying to imitate the NFL where, as here, the relevant considerations are completely different, and to dump your head-to-head tiebreakers in favor of total points.

total points is awful.

team a - 200, 75, 75

team b - 101, 101, 101

who's the better team?

ummm lets see 350 vs 303.

Not sure. That's a pretty small sample though. Usually seasons are longer than that.

The point isn't that total points is 100% likely to determine the best team. The point is that it's a much better first tiebreaker in fantasy football than head to head.

Team A beats Team B twice by 1 point, but Team B outscores Team A by an average of 30 points a game. Who's the better team? Team A didn't play defense against Team B--Team B just happened to have its off weeks, and/or Team A happened to have its on weeks, when they played one another.

So, not going to claim that total points is not awful. I don't think it is awful and some leagues actually use total points to determine their whole standings. But it can be both awful and a much better tiebreaker than head-to-head, so even if you could prove it is in fact awful, it wouldn't alter the force of my point. If total points as tiebreaker is awful, head-to-head is atrocious.

I'd sooner go with points-against as the first tiebreaker than head-to-head.

The reason we like the head-to-head format and the wins-losses determining standings is that it makes for a lot of week-to-week excitement. Leagues that use total points to determine everything can be not as exciting, because there are no clear goals every week and sometimes someone can get way out in front and effectively end the season early.

The only reason for putting up with head-to-head to determine anything is the excitement level it generates. It's too hard for the average Joe to follow head-to-head for it to produce much excitement as a tiebreaker, because when the season nears its end you have to go check a schedule and figure out who beat whom and it can get complicated.

Total points is both better at rewarding the more worthy team, and better at generating excitement when used as a tiebreaker because it's easier to follow along with.

It can set up a situation like the one we had this year in our league. My team had to not only win its last game, but outscore the team at the top in points by a certain number of points to get into the playoffs. It was exciting, because everyone could tell exactly what had to happen for my team to get into the playoffs right from the standings page.

I had only played that other team once and I beat them, by less than 5 points in Week 2. The other team had an off week that week. Had head-to-head been the tiebreaker, there would have been nothing that other team could've done in the last week to get into the playoffs assuming we ended up with the same record. But at the time we were playing that Week 2 match against one another, no one would have had any idea about whether it would end up mattering for the tiebreaker if we used head-to-head as tiebreaker. Total points leaves the tiebreaking up for grabs until the end in many cases.

In real sports leagues, at least leagues with unbalanced schedules like the NFL, head-to-head as first tiebreaker makes a ton of sense. In fantasy leagues, total points is superior in every way.

One great week can skew a team's total points as I stated above.

200-75-75 vs. 101-101-101

Team B is clearly the better team. 2-1 Head to head. More consistent but loses by 47 points if you look at Total points.

Team B could beat team A by 5 points in each of the next 9 weeks, be 11-1 H2H and still be down 2 points in total head to head in the season. All because of ONE week where he blew up for 200 points.

Points are an awful way to judge a team. We had a team in our football league who had most points 4 weeks in a row.. He lost his last 7 games and still had most points in the league and finished 6-7.

No. You make bad rules when you tailor your rules to deal with exceptional cases.

I can make an unlikely scenario too. How about Team A scores 200 points every game except for the one game it had against Team B in which it scored 75. Team B scores 100 points every single game. Team B finishes with 1400 points. Team A finishes with 2675 points. Both finish 13-1. No one thinks Team B is the better team, but Team B wins the head-to-head tiebreaker because it happened to get Team A on the schedule on Team A's one bad week.

Head-to-head tiebreakers are more likely to cause one or two weeks to decide the tiebreaker. In your unlikely scenario, total points is decided by one good week. But head-to-head ALWAYS decides things by one or two weeks, at least when you're talking about two teams.

The issue isn't whether total points is the most perfect tiebreaker imaginable. The issue is whether it is superior to head-to-head, and it is. Total points isn't always going to be the greatest measure of consistency. But it's almost always going to be better at it than head-to-head.

And total points as tiebreaker is the easier one to follow along with. And that makes for more drama. It's right there in the standings, and everyone always knows exactly what everyone needs to do to win a tiebreaker by just glancing at the standings. If you want to use some complicated statistic that takes both total points and consistency into effect, that's fine, and it could be better at determining who the better team is in some sense than total points alone. But it will be harder to follow, unless it's something that appears on the standings page maybe.

And the last thing you'd want for a consistency statistic would be to single out one or two games and look at how the teams did in those one or two games--head-to-head as a tiebreaker is pretty much the opposite of a consistency statistic.

The arguments for head-to-head as tiebreaker are all bad ones. One can argue about points-against vs. points-for, or point differential perhaps. One can argue about more complicated statistical measures. Head-to-head, in fantasy, is pretty much the worst conceivable tiebreaker. It's probably a little better than flipping a coin but only a little.

So both teams finished 13-1, and you think the h2h winner shouldn't be crowned the division champ? LOL.

what kind of world do you live in? A team was 13-1 and BEAT the other 13-1 team. There's literally no argument. If the team was 14-0, you would be OK with it right? Despite the 2675 to 1400 points? So what's the difference? I think we both agree team A is better, but the world doesn't operate that way. Patriots are better than Denver...they lost on the road, therefore they are eliminated. If you are going to have an off week, well that's a BAD time to pick an off week.

My teams play everyone in their division, 2 or more times to squash this situation. If a team won twice and both teams were 12-2, and team A had 2 thousand more points but lost both games cause he scored 75, do you you still say team A deserves the division title?

It's because we aren't playing defense against one another. In real sports, yes this would be a situation in which you could laugh at. In fantasy, we are just arbitrarily matched up with other teams every week and the two teams' scores are compared. They aren't really playing against one another in any sense that should make you want to LOL.

In fantasy, the head-to-head format is tolerated, even though it is not very good at rewarding the best teams, because it makes for week-to-week excitement. Making the tiebreaker also depend on head-to-head adds nothing to that week-to-week excitement though. It detracts from week-to-week excitement just because you can't tell what's going on with the tiebreakers from just looking at the standings page.

There is not much of an argument that head-to-head shouldn't be the first tiebreaker in real football. The situation in fantasy football is completely different. You have to ignore that difference in order to laugh about this. You want the tiebreaker to reward the better team. What one team did against one other team on one or two weeks has little to do with which team is better, in fantasy. Total points is generally going to bear a much closer relationship with team quality in fantasy.