Quick Sticks: LaxxTV Announces 2013 Schedule


Editor’s Note: While there are a couple NCAA D2 games towards the end of the season, it is great to see an MCLA heavy broadcast schedule. LaxxTV will be featuring live games on their website throughout the season. This is a fantastic opportunity for the MCLA to get some well-deserved publicity and exposure nationwide. Very exciting stuff! 

We will be adding all of these games to our 2013 TV schedule, so make sure to stay tuned so you can catch all the games being broadcast on the TV and streamed over the internet.


LaxxTV Announces 2013 Schedule

Richmond, VA – LaxxTV is proud to announce live professional webcast and replay coverage of the upcoming 2013 season.  Including games from the MCLA & NCAA, LaxxTV is changing the way you follow lacrosse.

“After our first year, we are even more committed to giving fans more access to live & tape delay games throughout the United States which is why we selected these games.” Says co-founder Will Oakley.  Oakley continued, “ We are excited to improve upon our coverage last year and continue to grow the game of lacrosse.  Our setup will provide our users with a great user experience and allow them to see a wide variety of teams play.”

Date Game Location Division


Portland v. Portland St Portland MCLA D2


Oregon v. Western Oregon Eugene MCLA D1


Fraser v. Oregon Eugene MCLA D1


California v. Northeastern California MCLA D1


Boise State v. Washington Seattle MCLA D1


Minnesota-Duluth v. Cal Poly Minnesota MCLA D1


Cal Poly v. Arizona State Minnesota MCLA D1


Minnesota-Duluth v. Arizona State Minnesota MCLA D1


California v. Sonoma State California MCLA D1


Dominican v. Chestnut Hill Dominican NCAA D2


Arizona v. Washington Seattle MCLA D1


Southern Oregon v. Whitman Portland MCLA D2


Sonoma State v. Oregon State Corvallis MCLA D1


SCAD v. Missouri Baptist Atlanta MCLA D2


Kennesaw v. Missouri Baptist Atlanta MCLA D2


Chico State v. Oregon State Corvallis MCLA D1


UMD v. Missouri Duluth MCLA D1


Brigham Young v. Oregon California MCLA D1


Brigham Young v. California California MCLA D1


St. Thomas v. Western Oregon Minnesota MCLA D2


St. John’s v. Western Oregon Minnesota MCLA D2


St. Thomas v. St. Johns’ Minnesota MCLA D2


Oregon v. Idaho Bend MCLA D1


St. Johns’ v. NDSU Minnesota MCLA D2


Portland v. Western Oregon Salem MCLA D2


Minnesota v. St. John’s Minnesota MCLA D2


Minnesota v. St. Thomas Minnesota MCLA D2


Dominican v. Whittier Dominican NCAA D2


Minnesota v. UMD Minnesota MCLA D1


Oregon v. Oregon State Salem MCLA D1


St. Cloud State v. Minnesota-Mankato Mankato MCLA D1


NDNU v. Whittier NDNU NCAA D2


NDNU v. Dominican Kezar NCAA D2

These games will be available on the LaxxTV platform. In addition, LaxxTV is offering for teams to utilize the LaxxTV platform to stream their games to help provide their fans access to their games.

“We are continuing to provide teams and fans 24/7/365 access to high level lacrosse. “ says co-founder Panchito Ojeda.  “We are excited about giving back to the game that gave us so much throughout our lives.  Growing our sport through online media is our mission and we believe this ought to get us one step closer to accomplishing that mission.”

About LaxxTV

LaxxTV is changing the way you follow lacrosse by providing online streaming of games, access to all the news and information through its news aggregation and intuitive way to talk about pressing issues in lacrosse in the LaxxTV forums.


    • Personal preference is one thing. Effectively cheating by having a pocket that skirts the rules is another.

      I think creativity started to outpace regulation, and I like guys trying to find advantages. But I also like the rules to help foster a game of skill and passing.

      This seemed to be a middle ground. Personally, I’d prefer to see even wider heads down the line, and less restrictions on stringing. Think that could work?

  1. I heard at one point they thought by having the donut guys could slash harder by having more torque. Personally I think it’s one of the dumbest rules out there. Second, I completely agree with the getting rid of the back of the stick check. For me it was hit or miss with a stick. Some of them had basically no hold and rattled when the ball was in the stick, but in the back of the stick it got stuck, while others would fall right out of the back of the stick but I could barely get the ball out of the pocket if I tried. 

  2. Fascinating post…the first rule is really untenable (my 1984 laserlite has a 4 inch in diameter butt end!)…the second rule should have been kept.  And, why did they change it with almost no notice!

  3. I’ve never heard anything about the 3.5 in rule…very interesting.  Don’t really see any advantage to having a donut but whatever they say.  

    Now the second rule is a heaven sent.  The FOGOs on my team and the others in our league have had an absolutely miserable time trying to get the ball to come out of our already warped heads.  You can only bend/bake/boil a head so many times before it serves no purpose at all.  This way, we won’t be penalized every other faceoff because the ball won’t come out of the back of the head.

    I’m all for speeding up the game and making turnovers “easier” but that back rule was a pain in the butt.

  4. No butt end?  Wouldn’t that be a safety issue?  I remember in a game an opposing player had only tape to cover the butt end (similar to the pink taped above) and he came to box me out on a gb and his butt end found my hip.  I had a hefty quarter sized welt that cut me later to find out that it was intentional on his behalf to expose the end.  Yes, it’s up to us to have integrity to play the game right, but there are those out there who will do anything to gain an edge, even if it comes to the expense of player safety.

  5. I’d like to understand what advantage or issue is created by a larger but end or 

    “donut”?  While I an understand the desire to modify some of the rules as they relate to sticks and speed of the game, it seems that few of these rules are needed or even well thought out.

  6. I agree that the 3.5″ circumference rule needs some clarification. As you said most shafts are just under that without a butt end to begin with. I think it’s also a safety issue because the smaller circumference could lead to sticks being able to slip through face masks in my opinion. Hopefully there is a more thorough explanation on these rule changes soon.

  7. I am not sure you are reading the circumference for the tape correctly. The officials will not measure around the shaft. They will simply hold up their tape measure and measure across the shaft. 3.5” taped end is actually really big. So from one side to the opposite side can not exceed 3.5”.  I hope you are able to understand what I am saying.

  8. Someone really does need to push Hind & Zimmerman for clarification on the Butt End rule.  Seems rather silly to not allow a normal butt end cap that doesn’t widen the stick any more than it has to.  Also, wouldn’t number 3 in the picture above be illegal, as the tape isn’t covering the whole hole? It was my understanding that not only the edges had to be covered, but the hole itself as well.