Sections

MCLA_Quick-Sticks

Quick Sticks: LaxxTV Announces 2013 Schedule

20 - Published January 29, 2013 by in ,

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

2-Feb

Portland v. Portland St Portland MCLA D2

6-Feb

Oregon v. Western Oregon Eugene MCLA D1

13-Feb

Fraser v. Oregon Eugene MCLA D1

21-Feb

California v. Northeastern California MCLA D1

22-Feb

Boise State v. Washington Seattle MCLA D1

22-Feb

Minnesota-Duluth v. Cal Poly Minnesota MCLA D1

23-Feb

Cal Poly v. Arizona State Minnesota MCLA D1

24-Feb

Minnesota-Duluth v. Arizona State Minnesota MCLA D1

2-Mar

California v. Sonoma State California MCLA D1

2-Mar

Dominican v. Chestnut Hill Dominican NCAA D2

3-Mar

Arizona v. Washington Seattle MCLA D1

9-Mar

Southern Oregon v. Whitman Portland MCLA D2

10-Mar

Sonoma State v. Oregon State Corvallis MCLA D1

15-Mar

SCAD v. Missouri Baptist Atlanta MCLA D2

16-Mar

Kennesaw v. Missouri Baptist Atlanta MCLA D2

17-Mar

Chico State v. Oregon State Corvallis MCLA D1

24-Mar

UMD v. Missouri Duluth MCLA D1

25-Mar

Brigham Young v. Oregon California MCLA D1

26-Mar

Brigham Young v. California California MCLA D1

26-Mar

St. Thomas v. Western Oregon Minnesota MCLA D2

27-Mar

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

6-Apr

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

6-Apr

Oregon v. Idaho Bend MCLA D1

11-Apr

St. Johns’ v. NDSU Minnesota MCLA D2

12-Apr

Portland v. Western Oregon Salem MCLA D2

13-Apr

Minnesota v. St. John’s Minnesota MCLA D2

14-Apr

Minnesota v. St. Thomas Minnesota MCLA D2

19-Apr

Dominican v. Whittier Dominican NCAA D2

20-Apr

Minnesota v. UMD Minnesota MCLA D1

20-Apr

Oregon v. Oregon State Salem MCLA D1

21-Apr

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

21-Apr

NDNU v. Whittier NDNU NCAA D2

27-Apr

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.

,

20 Responses to Quick Sticks: LaxxTV Announces 2013 Schedule

  1. jimmychange February 5, 2013 at 7:25 pm #

    wait… so the back test has officially been scrapped?

  2. Byron Johnson February 5, 2013 at 7:30 pm #

    .

    • connorwilson February 5, 2013 at 7:49 pm #

      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?

      • Jamie Barter February 5, 2013 at 11:17 pm #

        fine if they made wider heads. But some heads were practically impossible to make meet the back test rule. Unless you were a top d1 player that could get new heads all the time it was going to cause alot of problems.

        • Cadlax February 6, 2013 at 12:51 am #

          Exactly, it came down to the fact that existing inventories were largely all going to fail the back test.

  3. Kyle Peterson February 5, 2013 at 7:39 pm #

    I just got a 3-minute nonreleasable and my stick was out due to that back test rule.  Outside of FOS, I didn’t understand this rule.

  4. Andrew Ratzke February 5, 2013 at 7:42 pm #

    Isn’t the point of a wide end cap preventing sticks from going through a face mask? What advantage does a bigger end cap give a player? Strange.

    • Kyle Peterson February 5, 2013 at 7:44 pm #

      I think the larger end caps were preventing people from getting yardsale’d.  That and possibly the donuts that would basically shorten the stick.

      • connorwilson February 5, 2013 at 7:45 pm #

        Some claim donuts allowed for players to get more pull and torque on shots. I’m not sure what the reasoning is though.

  5. Ben Mayo February 5, 2013 at 8:11 pm #

    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. 

  6. The Rev. Peter M. Carey February 5, 2013 at 8:19 pm #

    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!

  7. Vallivuelaxer February 5, 2013 at 8:33 pm #

    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.

  8. buzzaldy February 6, 2013 at 11:33 am #

    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.

  9. Dee Eh February 6, 2013 at 1:53 pm #

    3.5 inches, just skinny enough to slide in between the bars of my facemask. I’ve got a nice octagon cut on my lip and nose. thanks rules committee, way to think this one through.

  10. Coach Vin February 6, 2013 at 3:28 pm #

    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.

  11. Travis StPierre February 6, 2013 at 4:51 pm #

    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.

  12. buzzaldy February 6, 2013 at 5:12 pm #

    I have this odd feeling that they’ll take away any sort of whip and pocket depth soon

  13. stllax February 6, 2013 at 8:16 pm #

    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.

    • bsigmund90 February 7, 2013 at 10:58 am #

       Circumference and Diameter are two different things…

  14. bsigmund90 February 7, 2013 at 11:03 am #

    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.

Leave a Reply