That's not a bad idea. However, if the H2H winner is hundreds of points back from the points winner, your proposed system would also let a bunch of other low-scoring (undeserving) teams into the playoffs.
Also, it doesn't help this type of scenario either:
Team 1 - 10-3 - 1935 pts
Team 2 - 9-4 - 1940 pts
Team 3 - 9-4 - 1930 pts
Team 4 - 8-5 - 1925 pts
Team 5 - 7-6 - 1820 pts
Team 6 - 7-6 - 1810 pts
Just looking at this, doesn't it seem that all four of the top scoring teams are pretty darned close and that the true "best team" hasn't yet been determined?
That's why I suggested "within 2% of the top scorer". It wouldn't be arbitrary and being percentage-based would make it relative to each league (whereas points wouldn't). Two percent of 1940 is 38.8 points, so any team above 1901.2 would make it.
Is this really so hard to document and convey? Once understood, wouldn't people be thankful that only the NFFC was willing to take their already industry-leading scoring format to this next level in order to ensure all of the best teams get to compete in the playoffs?
And as we both said, it still pays 1/3 to the H2H champ and 1/3 to the points leader after 13 weeks. Plus, just like now, if the points leader has a large lead over other teams, then it'd still be a two-team playoff for the remaining 1/3. But when the lead isn't large, other deserving teams would still have a shot at league prize money, keeping more teams interested and involved and with an increased confidence in ROI potential.
Here's an actual example going on right now in Classic New York Sept. 8 1 pm ET League (through 12 games):
Record PointsFor PtsRank Back
1) 9-3 1513.30 11 272.45
2) 8-4 1766.80 2 18.95
3) 8-4 1465.10 12 320.65
4) 7-5 1603.15 3 182.60
5) 7-5 1600.25 4 185.50
6) 7-5 1587.30 6 198.45
7) 7-5 1568.50 9 217.25
8) 6-6 1785.75 1
9) 6-6 1594.75 5 191.00
10) 6-6 1570.00 7 215.75
11) 6-6 1569.30 8 216.45
12) 3-9 1422.35 14 363.40
13) 2-10 1562.85 10 222.90
14) 2-10 1434.00 13 351.75
With your proposed system of "anyone who outscores the H2H champ" making the league playoffs, there would be
11 teams playing for the last 1/3, even though 8 of us are 163+ points back from the 2nd high scorer. Though I might benefit from that, I don't at all believe it's fair.
With the current system, just the top scorer would play the H2H team in the playoffs for the last 1/3. Team 2 would earn a berth in the overall national playoffs, but not have a chance at any further league prizes. Yet he is less than 19 points back from the high scorer and 253.5 ahead of the H2H champ, as well as 163.65 ahead of the 3rd highest scoring team. Clearly he and the high scorer have been far and away the best two teams in this league and should both have a chance at that last 1/3 (along with the H2H champ), no?
With my proposed system of "any team within 2% of the top scoring team", 2% of 1785.75 = 35.7. The 2nd highest scoring team is just 18.95 back from the top scorer, so the 2nd scorer would also get to play for the league's last 1/3 (in addition to his overall playoff berth). And if there were a couple more teams within 35.7, they'd also get to vie for the league playoff's last 1/3, but they still wouldn't qualify for the overall national playoffs.
Isn't this a win-win solution?
For the record, I am team 10 above; so this obviously isn't a case of me lobbying for what personally benefits me.
All of that said, as was suggested to me privately by someone, I also wouldn't have a problem with
ALL teams being in the running for the final league 1/3 prize. After all, some teams suffered injuries and for other reasons too maybe are just coming on strong towards the end. Why not let the full 16 weeks play out for that last 1/3 (with no reset of point totals or a 3x season average to = the 3 playoff games)? After all, if a team truly is the best, then they would still have the most points after 16 weeks, no? Again, this in no way would effect who makes the overall national playoffs; that would still be determined as it is now. This might help alleviate the issue of some teams quitting early too because now they'd know they have 3 more weeks to stage a comeback (though of course, nothing can really help teams who are
hundreds of points back).
Lastly, I know I'm one to often offer suggestions or criticisms, but I also know I don't make a good enough effort to equally give praise where it's due. But suffice it to say that ALL 15 of the fantasy football leagues I do are solely with the NFFC because I really do think they have the best variety of offerings, and I also appreciate the enormous effort they expend to continue improving their offerings. On top of that, Greg and Tom are unbelievably accessible to their customers, which is really unheard of nowadays. So please understand the spirit of my suggestions; I'm really not saying "Damn! The NFFC sucks and here's why!". I'm sincerely just trying to help tweak an already fantastic service. Kudos to both of you, Greg and Tom.
So all play it is. 
)
...