No abstract

No abstract

The bowl-championship-series (BCS) committee uses 10 ranking schemes, including eight computer rankings, to select college football teams for bowl-championship-series bowl games, including the national championship game. The large financial benefits of participating in BCS bowl games make it imperative that the selection process accurately select the best teams. I evaluated the performance of the 10 ranking schemes the BCS committee used during the 1999 and 2000 seasons to select bowl teams. I found that almost all are equally accurate, but the Seattle Times scheme clearly underperforms the others. In addition, two proposed changes to the BCS selection formula, (1) to prohibit computer ranking schemes from considering the margin of victory in their rankings, and (2) to include explicitly the outcomes of head-to-head games among teams being considered for BCS bowls, could do more harm than good and could decrease the likelihood of the committee selecting the best teams for the BCS bowls. (Recreation and sports. Statistics: data analysis.

Consideration of the integrated production-location problem is extended to include several types of business taxes. Many of these taxes are technologically and spatially neutral under certainty, but are shown to be nonneutral when factor prices are stochastic and the firm is risk averse, even when the tax is spatially uniform. Consequently, even a nationally uniform tax can have regional biases and can encourage migration of plants. When factor prices are uncertain, the effects of taxes on output rates, input ratios, and plant location vary with the form of the tax imposed as well as the amount to be paid. Income taxes involve the taxing authority in sharing the risk with the firm and are shown to promote risk taking by the firm and induce the expansion of output. Locational incentives which are mutually beneficial to firms and the government are presented.