The autumn/winter collection for 2016 is now arriving at Greenes Shoes store nationwide.We are currently stocking top brands from around the world including Amy huberman, Fly London, Irregular choice, Ruby Shoo, Marco Tozzi, Heavenly Feet, Ecco, Gabor, Tommy Bowe, Base London, Wrangler, Converse, Vans, Superdry, New Balance and many many more!We are very enticed about our new season styles and hope that you will be to. Why don’t you call to Greenes Shoes on the Market Square and in Letterkenny Shopping centre to get kitted out for the winter months ahead.A deposit will secure any item in-store while you can also shop online at www.greenesshoes.com, where we offer free delivery and returns within Ireland.Also check us out on Facebook to keep up to date with all our new stock as it arrives in store https://www.facebook.com/Greenesshoes/ You’re a ‘shoe-in’ at Greenes with autumn/winter arrivals! was last modified: September 7th, 2016 by StephenShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Tags:AutumndonegalGreene’s Shoes
CLICK HERE if you are having a problem viewing the photos on a mobile deviceSANTA CLARA — Wasn’t long ago that Nick Mullens was a college whippersnapper at the fabled Manning Passing Academy in Louisiana, where he admired how “smooth” Eli Manning looked in a cameo.Monday night, Mullens will make his encore as the 49ers starting quarterback, and it will be against Manning, a 15th-year veteran for the New York Giants.Recalling that June 2016 invitation from Archie Manning, Mullens noted …
St. Bernard’s (1-0) 36 El Molino (0-1) 7The third consecutive year St. Bernard’s has opened with a win over El Molino.Del Norte (1-0) 20 Moreau Catholic (0-1) 19A quality win for Del Norte over the No. 1 ranked team in North Coast Section D-VI and a top-20 ranked team in the NCS overall.Placer (1-0) 40 Eureka (0-1) 27Eureka’s 21-game regular season win streak comes to a close.Cardinal Newman (1-0) 38 Fortuna (0-1) 0Fortuna was blown out by Cardinal Newman in each of the previous two …
Essential Reading! Get my 3rd book: Eat Their Lunch “The first ever playbook for B2B salespeople on how to win clients and customers who are already being serviced by your competition.” Buy Now Most of your “shoulds” are really “musts.” And most of your “musts” are really “shoulds.”You think you “should” nurture your dream clients. You believe that you “must” live in your inbox, waiting to respond or react to whatever other people request of you. You have this backwards. You “must” nurture your dream clients. You should check your inbox a couple of times a day.You think that you “should” be prospecting. You believe that you must spend time on social media sites during working hours, even though you are really only consuming content. You have these exactly backwards. You “must” prospect. You should limit the time you spend on consuming content.Your brain is constantly nagging you that you “should” follow up with the clients and prospects you visited this week. And while you’re at it, your mind reminds you that you should follow up on all your leads. You believe that you must respond to the RFP that showed up unsolicited and that you have no business responding to, least of all since the due date is three weeks from now. You “must” follow up—if you are to succeed in sales. You should avoid things that look like work but produce no real outcomes.If you believe that you should do something, that “should” is more likely a “must.” One of the keys to success is to know what is really a “must” and what is a “should,” and then doing everything that “must” be done.
The National Cadet Corps (NCC), India’s military youth movement in schools and colleges, is all set to grow with the defence ministry planning to increase its sanctioned strength from the existing 13 lakh to 15 lakh cadets.The outfit is also readying to change its training syllabus, refining the philosophy to make it contemporary and meet the aspirations of the country’s youth.These issues were discussed at the NCC Central Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting chaired by Minister of State for Defence M.M. Pallam Raju recently.”The important issues discussed during the CAC meeting included introduction of a new syllabus based on the refined training philosophy to make it contemporary and meet the aspirations of the youth of the country.””In addition, an increase in authorised strength of cadets to be enrolled in NCC, raising of additional NCC units and enhanced role of NCC cadets in social and community development programme were also discussed during the meeting,” defence ministry officials said.Addressing the meeting, Raju complimented the NCC on the excellent performance of its cadets in various activities pertaining to training, sports, adventure, social service and community development.Describing the NCC cadets as “leaders of tomorrow,” Raju said since they are the key instruments of social change, economic growth and technological innovations, there is an urgent need to channelise their energy in proper direction with care.On the occasion, NCC Director General Lt. Gen. P.S. Bhalla presented a detailed update on NCC activities in the past two years to the members of the CAC.CAC is the apex body that advises the government on policies regarding the constitution and administration of NCC.The CAC also consists of nominated members of parliament, the tri-services chiefs, and eminent educationists.- With inputs from IANSadvertisement
Till a few months ago, India’s middle order looked rock solid in the longest format of cricket. However, with the departure of Rahul Dravid and VVS Laxman, Indian selectors and the team management have been short of ideas as far as their replacements are concerned.However, the solution might already be there in Indias playing XI. Skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni might look to Delhi batsman Virender Sehwag to anchor a solid role in the middle order rather than using him in his usual role as an opener as India take on New Zealand in the twp-Test series beginning in Hyderabad on Thursday.Sehwag can bring solidity to the middle order if he curbs his natural playing instincts. In fact, Sehwag had himself expressed his desire to bat in the Indian middle order earlier this year.No doubt, Sehwags solid starts have been central to shaping many a wins for Dhoni’s Devils in the longer version. However, the exit of highly dependable Dravid and crisis manager Laxman has left a big hole in India’s batting order.And the onus is on the team management to either plug the gap in the middle with youngsters like Cheteshwar Pujara and Suresh Raina or offer Sehwag his much sought after slot at 5 or 6.Dhoni, in his media address ahead of the opening Test against New Zealand, had said that India would miss the two top batsmen, but he also insisted that the youngsters needed to step up to fill the gap.The presence of Mumbai’s Ajinkya Rahane could provide India an opportunity to experiment with the Gautam Gambhir-Rahane combine at the top against the inexperienced Kiwis.advertisementSehwag’s record as an opener stands testament to his prowess with the new ball. However, for a batsman who started off with a debut Test century batting at number six on a hostile Bloemfontein track in South Africa in 2001, one cannot deny Sehwag’s utility as a middle order batsman.While it has been a catch-22 situation for Dhoni and coach Duncan Fletcher, if the explosive Sehwag can prove his mettle lower down the order against the Kiwis it would certainly lend some much needed strength to India’s batting mix.Moreover, the move could provide India some much-needed dependability and experience in the middle before the more dangerous Englishmen and Aussies come calling.Teams (from):India: Mahendra Singh Dhoni (Capt), Gautam Gambhir, Virender Sehwag, Virat Kohli, Sachin Tendulkar, Cheteshwar Pujara, Suresh Raina, Ravichandran Ashwin, Pragyan Ojha, Zaheer Khan, Ishant Sharma, Umesh Yadav, Ajinkya Rahane, Subramaniam Badrinath and Piyush Chawla.New Zealand: Ross Taylor (Capt), Trent Boult, Doug Bracewell, Daniel Flynn, James Franklin, Martin Guptill, Chris Martin, Brendon McCullum, Tarun Nethula, Jeetan Patel, Tim Southee, Kruger van Wyk, Neil Wagner, BJ Watling, Kane Williamson.Match Starts at 9.30 AM IST.
The two nations lost a bid last year to secure a court injunction that would have stopped work on the dam project because the judge said if the First Nations lost the challenge, the project would be needlessly put in disarray.The latest figure on the cost of the dam is $10.7 billion and when complete on the Peace River in northeast B.C. it would power the equivalent of 450,000 homes a year.The release says the parties will continue trial preparations while talks proceed. VICTORIA, B.C. – The British Columbia government, BC Hydro and two First Nations have entered talks to avoid court action over the massive Site C hydroelectric dam.The parties were in B.C. Supreme Court on Tuesday to set a 120-day trial that was expected to start in 2022.However, a government news release says the West Moberly First Nations and Prophet River First Nation have agreed to enter into confidential discussions to find alternatives to legal action.
Hours before the Australian Open started in Melbourne on Monday, BuzzFeed News and the BBC published results from a joint investigation showing that tennis authorities hadn’t punished male pros repeatedly flagged for suspicions that they were fixing matches — deliberately losing, or arranging for their opponent to lose, to maximize their or others’ betting profits. Tennis authorities quickly gathered in Melbourne for a news conference responding to the charges, saying they had “thoroughly investigated” any evidence brought to them.The process by which tennis investigates alleged match-fixing is so secretive that it’s impossible to judge the accuracy of authorities’ response. But the BuzzFeed-BBC report, and its aftermath, does provide a case study of how difficult it is to evaluate what could look like suspicious betting activity. It’s possible to use data analysis, as BuzzFeed did, to raise questions about certain matches and players; it’s much harder, and may be impossible, to use that data to accuse specific players of throwing matches without the additional investigative powers tennis authorities wield — and according to the BuzzFeed-BBC report, often aren’t using.As part of the investigation, John Templon, an investigative data reporter for BuzzFeed News, spent more than a year analyzing 26,000 professional men’s matches and found 15 players who lost matches with unusual betting patterns “startlingly often.” (Match-fixing is also believed to occur in professional women’s tennis, but the BuzzFeed-BBC investigation focused only on men’s tennis, so we are in this article, too.) BuzzFeed and BBC didn’t name these players, citing a lack of evidence of wrongdoing and possible alternative explanations for underperformance, including injury. But BuzzFeed did release an anonymized version of the data it used on GitHub, including a file containing betting odds and the year for 129,271 matches.Quickly, people wrote on Twitter and on GitHub that the data could be de-anonymized, thereby identifying the 15 players Templon mentioned. Ian Dorward, a London-based tennis bettor who used to set and adjust tennis betting lines for a bookmaker, emailed me the list of what he believed to be the 15 names. After Chris Bol, a data analyst based in Utrecht, the Netherlands, published the same names, Dorward went public with his findings, which criticized BuzzFeed for making the data relatively easy to crack.1How could the data be de-anonymized so quickly? Dorward told me he went through the process step by step, analyzing the big data set of matches. First he identified outlier players: Those who are almost always favorites are likely the very top players. Then he found unusual matches, like those that weren’t completed. That allowed him to identify some opponents. And so on, repeating the process. Bol used a different method, comparing the anonymous players’ annual win-loss records with those of actual players and finding the ones with the closest fit. The GitHub user said by email that finding odds for any single match on OddsPortal.com, the source for BuzzFeed’s betting-odds data, one would have a good chance of finding in the BuzzFeed data a unique match with those same odds and year, and repeating that process could identify the players. The user compared it to how anonymized AOL search data released in 2006 could be matched to individual Americans. BuzzFeed hasn’t confirmed the list of names — we’ll call them the BuzzFeed 15 — though the methods Bol and Dorward used appear straightforward and arrive at the same names. Asked for comment, BuzzFeed investigations and projects editor Mark Schoofs sent a statement by email. “The betting data we used in our analysis is publicly available — that’s how we got it,” Schoofs said. “In our journalism, we try to show as much of our work as possible, which is why we made the algorithm public.”Dorward looked more closely at eight matches that BuzzFeed’s analysis flagged and concluded that for each one, there was “no evidence of anything suspicious.”“It’s very, very dangerous to make blasé assumptions about a match being dubious because of prematch movements,” Dan Weston, a tennis analyst and trader who writes for the website of the sports book Pinnacle, said in a telephone interview. (Using only data on betting and results to demonstrate fixing has proven problematic in other sports.)“By itself, the analysis of betting data does not prove match-fixing,” Schoofs said in his statement. “That’s why we did not name the players and are declining to comment, and also why our investigation went much wider than the algorithm and was based on a cache of leaked documents, interviews across three continents, and much more.”So how could a player lose matches with big odds movements “startlingly often” without fixing matches?Well, lots of ways:A player could tank a match — deliberately lose it — without fixing. Sometimes players stand to make more money by losing early in one tournament so they can get to another. Other times, players might collect a bonus or appearance fee for showing up to a tournament they’d rather not play and then lose early so they can rest and focus on a bigger upcoming tournament.No. 1 Novak Djokovic was accused of doing just this — showing up to collect a bonus but losing deliberately at a tournament in Paris — in 2007 by the media and tennis-forum posters at the time, and by an Italian newspaper this week. At the time, Djokovic said he wasn’t well. Djokovic said Wednesday that he didn’t throw the match: “It’s not supported by any kind of proof, any evidence, any facts. … It’s not true.”Deliberately losing a match is punishable by a fine, but is a much less serious offense than fixing a match for gambling purposes.Bettors could have inside information on a match outcome without the player’s involvement. For instance, if the player isn’t at full strength, his coach, trainer, spouse, family members or friends might know it before betting markets do and use that knowledge or pass it on to other bettors. It might not even involve an insider at all. In the early rounds at small tournaments, a fan who happens to overhear a conversation or witness an injury at practice could trade on that knowledge before anyone else in the betting markets knows.Betting markets could simply get the opening odds wrong. BuzzFeed’s analysis identified matches for which at least one of seven major bookmakers’ odds moved by so much from when the market opened to when it closed — generally, the day or so between when a matchup is set and when the match starts — that one player’s implied chance of winning decreased by more than 10 percentage points. That typically happens when many bets are placed against the player, suggesting the initial odds were too bullish on his chances. Bookies then adjust the line to increase and balance betting volume and to reduce their exposure.Heavy betting against the player could mean some bettors know he’s going to lose. But it could also mean that many bettors spot favorable odds for reasons that the bookmaker isn’t taking into account. Often bookmakers use an algorithm to set initial odds. Depending on how sophisticated it is, that algorithm could fail to take into account injuries, or a bad matchup, or lack of play on the court surface. The more obscure the athletes involved, the more likely sports books are to whiff with their opening bid. (For reference, professional bettors in the U.S. say they focus their energies on a single, relatively unnoticed part of the sports landscape — say, backwater college basketball conferences or Major League Soccer — and use their expertise on this little swath of the sports cosmos to beat the relatively uninformed book. These bettors will often also make arrangements to trade their picks for another bettor’s picks in a different, equally obscure sport, which is how syndicates are formed and lines are moved.) Many of the flagged matches involve little-known players in third-tier tournaments, making the lines vulnerable to a well-informed bettor.BuzzFeed’s analysis included only the 39 players who lost 11 or more matches in which the odds moved heavily against them, and the 15 players it flagged were ones who lost far more of those matches than would be expected. BuzzFeed also corrected for what’s known as the multiple-testing problem, which can produce spurious results that look statistically significant, by using a Bonferroni correction — and it still found four players with significant results. So that should help mitigate concerns about any one match being a false positive. But some players are particularly tough for bookmakers to handicap, whether because they’re coming off an injury, or because they don’t play that often, or because they’re ranked higher than their true talent after a run of good luck that bettors, but not the bookmakers’ algorithms, account for. These kinds of reasons could help explain the presence of several of the players Dorward identified as being on BuzzFeed’s list. They’re also why alternative sourcing is so crucial; BuzzFeed provides supplementary evidence where it can, but as we’ll cover below, seemingly straightforward things like video of the matches in question can be hard to come by.The details of how BuzzFeed chose to do its analysis could affect which players are flagged as losing suspicious matches suspiciously often. BuzzFeed’s analysis is impressive in many ways. It’s vetted by two professors of statistics, covers 26,000 matches, excludes books with opening odds that are major outliers, accounts for multiple testing and chooses the same bookmakers that Dorward says he would have used. But any analysis involves making choices, and the more robust findings are ones that hold even when different reasonable choices are made.To check that, we enlisted the help of Jeff Sackmann, a tennis data analyst who wrote his own code, at our request, to collect and analyze tennis betting data. He checked more than twice as many matches — nearly 63,000 — from late 2008 through the start of this year. These included matches from the ATP World Tour and Grand Slam tournaments, which are included in BuzzFeed’s analysis, but also from Challengers, the sport’s minor league, where prize money and public attention are lower and the risk of match-fixing is believed to be higher.Following BuzzFeed’s methodology,2Dorward wrote by email that he identified the seven bookmakers BuzzFeed used: Bet365, Bwin, Pinnacle, Unibet, SBOBET, Ladbrokes and 188BET. BuzzFeed and Sackmann both excluded odds for each match from books that disagreed with the median implied winning probability by more than 10 percentage points. Sackmann found similar results for his expanded data set, including the same four players topping the BuzzFeed 15 list by losing the most matches relative to expectations. However, he also found that some players excluded from the analysis because they had too few flagged losses otherwise would have appeared because they lost every match with big odds movements.Sackmann also found that the results had less statistical significance — just one player, not four, lost a significantly larger number of matches than expected, after applying the Bonferroni correction. That’s in large part because Sackmann made one different choice: He used the median of all bookmakers’ opening odds for the true probability of a player winning the match, as opposed to the probability suggested by the opening odds from the bookmaker that had the biggest odds movement. That bookmaker usually was more bullish than its competitors about the player’s chances, so using its odds makes the player’s loss seem more surprising than it really was to the market as a whole. Also, Sackmann tested all players with at least 10 matches in which the odds moved heavily against them — not just players with 11 or more losses in matches like that.He also checked how the analysis would differ with a different set of bookmakers.3He chose 5Dimes, Island Casino, Bestbet, Jetbull, DOXXbet, Bet-at-home and Tipico because these are the ones with the most odds data in the database, excluding the seven BuzzFeed used, for matches for which five or fewer books set lines. He set the cutoff for flagged matches at 8 percentage points, not 10, to get roughly the same number of matches. When Sackmann used the same methodology that reproduced BuzzFeed’s list above, but with this set of bookmakers, he got very different results. Most of the names he identified as losing these matches surprisingly often were not the same as the ones he identified using BuzzFeed’s list of bookmakers.In its article, BuzzFeed writes that at least six of the 15 players it identified “have been flagged to tennis authorities by outside sources.” But the overlap could just mean that BuzzFeed and the outside sources were studying similar data with similar methods. Many of these outside sources named by BuzzFeed were using betting data as their basis for suspecting players of fixing; some, in fact, were part of the betting industry — a firm, a watchdog, a sports security association that collects alerts of suspicious betting from bookmakers. And some of the decisions BuzzFeed made in its analysis — such as where to set the cutoff in odds movement for a match to be worthy of more investigation — were based on suggestions from sports-betting investigators.None of this means that the BuzzFeed 15 haven’t fixed matches — just that, as BuzzFeed and the BBC themselves have made abundantly clear, the data analysis by itself isn’t conclusive.“It’s incredibly difficult to actually prove fixing,” Dorward said in a telephone interview.So what would be more conclusive?Other betting data. Tennis betting experts say the market has moved toward so-called in-play betting — bets placed during a match, as odds shift in response to what’s happening on the court. So, for instance, when a player wins a set, or a game, or even just an important point, bookmakers or betting exchanges quickly change the odds to reflect the increase in his probability of winning the match. That creates opportunity for bettors who know the fix is on to bet against the player who is ahead with even more favorable odds than the prematch line. BuzzFeed published a document from a 2008 investigation into match-fixing that identified several matches with that kind of suspicious betting pattern — including the sport’s most well-known example of suspected match-fixing and two other matches whose participants can be identified from the scores and opponent listed. None of the players involved are among the BuzzFeed 15. In-play betting data is available for purchase from some past matches, though it is difficult to use because it is not coded with information on the score at the time of bets. We also don’t have data on betting volumes and on maximum bets, which would show whether large amounts of money were at stake in flagged matches.Video evidence. Former player Daniel Koellerer — who was banned for life from pro tennis for fixing but denies the accusations — told the BBC that it would be easy for a pro to go unnoticed while fixing matches. But not every fixer covers his tracks well. Being able to review video of suspected matches would at least let authorities (or casual but interested onlookers) scrutinize a player’s effort throughout a match. However, not all matches are televised, and video is hard to get after the fact even for those that are. Tennis authorities ask YouTube to pull unauthorized matches and make video of archived matches available on the subscription site TennisTV for just seven days. Some older matches are available through the ATP Media Digital Archive, but this includes just one of the matches flagged for any of the BuzzFeed 15.Other corroborating evidence. This could include texts between or about players, bank records and other information.BuzzFeed and other journalists don’t have ready access to this kind of data. But tennis authorities do. The Tennis Integrity Unit — backed by the men’s and women’s pro tours, the four Grand Slams and the International Tennis Federation — can compel players to turn over phone and bank records, and it has access to detailed betting data. “Co-operative agreements with the betting industry, regulators and other parties (including ESSA, Betfair, UK Gambling Commission) can provide immediate real-time access to gambling market intelligence,” TIU spokesman Mark Harrison said in an email.Is the TIU using all of this information, along with tips about players suspected of fixing, and pursuing it as far as it can? The TIU says yes. It also maintains extreme secrecy around its operations, going so far as to not reveal details of its inquiries even in the rare cases when it announces a punishment. “TIU estimates that most, if not all, of the 18 successful corruption charges laid since 2010 would not have been achieved without the ability to work in confidence,” Harrison said.Maybe the TIU really has done all it can to root out corruption, chasing every player whose name comes across its desk. Maybe some turned out to be red herrings, like some of the BuzzFeed 15 might turn out to be. Maybe others really are fixing — giving in to the temptation to earn far more than they can by playing to win — but have gotten wise to tennis’s investigative approach and avoid using their phones or bank accounts. Or maybe fixing is very rare, and suspicious betting usually has innocent explanations.However, experience from other sports tells us there is also good reason to suspect that when sports regulate themselves, oversight can be lax. That’s really what’s at the core of BuzzFeed and the BBC’s reporting, more than the data analysis: a group of six former tennis insiders on one side saying tennis authorities haven’t followed up on what the former insiders think is compelling evidence of match-fixing, and on the other side those same authorities saying they have followed up, but confidentiality rules bar them from saying much more.Andrew Flowers contributed analysis to this article.
Shelby Lum / Photo editorJunior setter Taylor Sherwin serves the ball during a match against Dabrowa Sept. 4, at St. John Arena. OSU won, 3-2.The beat rolls on for the No. 23 Ohio State women’s volleyball team.The Buckeyes picked up three wins at the Four Points By Sheraton Seminole Invitational over the weekend to win the tournament, pushing their record to 6-0.OSU earned a five set victory against No. 16 Western Kentucky and then beat No. 15 Florida State 3-1 on Friday before sweeping unranked Florida Gulf Coast Saturday. It’s the first time the Buckeyes have started 6-0 since 2006.Coach Geoff Carlston said OSU “showed a lot of toughness” to beat Western Kentucky and that he was happy with how his offense performed on Florida State’s home court.“(I’m) just really happy with how our offense played against Florida State in a hostile environment,” Carlston said.The Buckeyes were led by outside hitter Kaitlyn Leary against the Hilltoppers, as the senior recorded her second double-double of the season with 20 kills and 10 digs.Freshman middle blocker Taylor Sandbothe and classmate Kylie Randall, an outside hitter, added 15 and 11 kills respectively. Another freshman, defensive specialist Valeria León, played in four of the five sets.Randall said in an email it was a huge accomplishment for her and her classmates to play a role as freshmen.“It was a huge accomplishment for all of us,” Randall said. “It felt really good to contribute and make an impact on and off the court.”Junior setter Taylor Sherwin tallied 47 assists and senior libero Davionna DiSalvatore added 16 digs.Against the Seminoles, Leary picked up a career high 27 kills while Sandbothe and Randall tied for second on the team with 11 kills apiece. Sherwin added 55 assists and senior defensive specialist Julianne Mandolfo had a team best 18 digs.Even though OSU won in straight sets, Florida Gulf Coast kept the second and third sets in question until the very end. The Buckeyes finished with 25-15, 28-26 and 26-24 set victories.Carlston said the match showed his team is able to keep up a high quality of play in tight situations.“We were down 24-21 in the third set and won the next five points straight,” Carlston said. “We are able to play well under pressure.”Leary again led the match with 19 kills and Randall completed 10 of her 16 attacks with two errors for a .500 attacking percentage.Sherwin continued her strong play with 34 assists to finish the tournament at a total of 136 after being named the tournament MVP and Big Ten setter of the week at the NIU Invitational to open the season.Carlston said Sherwin showed great decision making ability throughout the tournament.“Taylor Sherwin’s choices this weekend were as good as they’ve been since she’s been here,” he said.Junior setter Gigi Meyer, the daughter of OSU football coach Urban Meyer, had 30 assists and three service aces for Florida Gulf Coast.The Buckeyes return to Columbus this weekend for the Sports Imports DC Koehl Classic. They are scheduled to play Indiana University, Purdue University at Indianapolis Friday at 7 p.m. before matches on Saturday against Southeast Missouri at 12:30 p.m. and Xavier at 7 p.m.
OSU redshirt-freshman quarterback J.T. Barrett. Credit: Courtesy of OSUA typical highly-touted college football recruit hopes to see the field as soon as they arrive on campus, but that doesn’t always happen.Whether a player isn’t big enough, good enough or mature enough to play right away — or if there is simply a more experienced player ahead of them on the depth chart — many have to spend a season looking on as a redshirt.The 2013 Ohio State football team had a handful of hyped-up recruits — and even a couple of returning players — who took a redshirt season. While some of those players still face an uphill battle for playing time, others are set to make an instant impact in 2014.Headlining the group of 2013 redshirts is redshirt-freshman quarterback J.T. Barrett, who is slated to start this season for the Buckeyes after senior quarterback Braxton Miller suffered a torn labrum in his throwing shoulder last week. Barrett, who tore his ACL during his senior year of high school, hasn’t taken a competitive snap outside of practice in nearly two years.“(Barrett) had about 300 competitive throws this fall, where when (former OSU backup quarterback Kenny Guiton) went into the game a couple years ago, I think he had six,” OSU coach Urban Meyer said at a Wednesday press conference. “(Barrett) is a meticulous guy.”Before fall practice, Barrett had limited reps as a true freshman in 2013 and split time with redshirt-sophomore quarterback Cardale Jones in spring camp and during OSU’s Spring Game at Ohio Stadium. In the Spring Game, Barrett completed 17 of 33 pass attempts for 151 yards through the air.Barrett was a four-star recruit coming out of Rider High School in Wichita Falls, Texas, but still found himself buried behind more experienced players as a freshman. As the depth chart shifts heading into the new season, Barrett suddenly is on the list of key Buckeyes, and he won’t be the only one in that brand-new situation.At OSU’s annual media day on Aug. 10, Meyer rattled off the names of a few different players who weren’t as well-known in 2013 but could make an impact this season.“Dontre Wilson (and) Jalin Marshall are in a heated battle at the H-back position,” Meyer said. “Corey Smith and Michael Thomas have started the battle for top two or three receiver spots, and there is a bunch of guys, just don’t have time to go through them all.”While Wilson is entering his true sophomore season, the other three players Meyer singled out all redshirted last year. Marshall is a redshirt-freshman, Smith is a redshirt-junior after transferring from Grand Rapids Community College in Michigan before last season and Thomas is a redshirt-sophomore who played as a true freshman in 2012 before sitting out last year.When a player redshirts for a season, they are allowed to practice with the team but can’t play in games, and retain the year of eligibility. Therefore, a player who redshirts their first season will still have four years of eligibility remaining. A player can also receive a medical redshirt if they sustain a season-ending injury. In medical cases, the NCAA determines whether or not the player will be granted the medical hardship waiver and retain a year of eligibility.Even though Smith is fighting for playing time against established players such as seniors Evan Spencer and Devin Smith, he still hopes to find a way onto the field in his first season playing for the Buckeyes.“I plan on having a big role, just do my best in whatever role it is to contribute,” Corey Smith said at OSU’s media day. “But I plan on having a big role.”OSU wide receivers coach Zach Smith had high praise for the transfer student as well, calling him “one of the most talented guys” he has ever coached.“He is very talented,” Zach Smith said. “He has bought completely into the system instilled by coach Meyer, (OSU assistant athletic director for football sports performance) Mickey Marotti and myself.”Outside of Corey Smith, Marshall and Thomas, Barrett might have yet another target who redshirted last season.Redshirt-freshman tight end Marcus Baugh didn’t play in 2013 for his first year on campus and had just one reception for four yards in the spring game, but OSU tight ends coach Tim Hinton said he’s come a long way since arriving in Columbus.“Marcus Baugh has really matured as an individual and as a player,” Hinton said at OSU’s media day. “He’s physically developing. There’s a lot of raw talent.”While Baugh might not be expected to carry the team with senior tight end Jeff Heuerman and redshirt-junior tight end Nick Vannett already on the roster, his development can serve as proof of hard work during a redshirt season.Baugh was initially suspended for the first game of his freshman season after being cited for underage alcohol consumption before eventually redshirting.Like Thomas, redshirt-sophomore running back Bri’onte Dunn saw the field as a true freshman in 2012 before finding himself buried on the depth chart the following year.In 11 games as a freshman, Dunn carried the ball 25 times for 133 yards and even scored a pair of touchdowns, but went into last season behind now former OSU players Carlos Hyde and Jordan Hall, as well as now-redshirt-senior Rod Smith and now-sophomore Ezekiel Elliott in the pecking order.After averaging nearly six yards per carry and scoring a touchdown in the spring game, as well as putting on a strong performance in fall camp, Meyer said Dunn, along with Rod Smith, is firmly in the mix at running back this season, even though Elliott is expected to be the No. 1 on opening day.“I give credit to Bri’onte and Rod,” Meyer said Aug. 17. “Every day they’ve worked their tails off.”Even though their college experience might have started off differently than they hoped, each of these redshirts could be looking to come out fresh and strong for the Buckeyes this season.OSU is scheduled to start its season Saturday against Navy at M&T Bank Stadium in Baltimore. Kickoff is set for noon.