Every year, players and coaches wait to see if the committee of conference representatives can *finally* get it right. 

This year was not that year. 

To be clear, this is not about taking anything away from the athletes who were selected. Making any All-CIF list is an accomplishment. But when the process produces obvious inconsistencies — and in some cases appears to ignore its own criteria — it is fair to ask questions.

And this year, there are a lot of questions.

Let’s start with what does make sense.

---

DOMINANCE OF AVOCADO & WESTERN LEAGUES

Of the 30 selections, 26 came from the two power leagues: Avocado and Western. That tracks. Those leagues were clearly the strongest in San Diego this season, especially with the North County Conference re-leaguing annually based on competitive ranking.

There are years when people push for more “balance” across leagues, but realistically, the best teams usually have the best players. The bulk of the list coming from those two leagues makes sense.

ISLANDER OVERLOAD

Coronado was the dominant team this season, so seeing the Islanders lead the way in selections also makes sense. Whether all six selections were warranted is debatable, but they absolutely deserved a major presence on the list.

And honestly, that is about as far as our praise for the committee can go.

Because once you get past those two things, the math starts to fall apart.

---

RULES BROKEN

The clearest issue is that three athletes selected for All-CIF were not even named First Team in their own league.

Again, this is not about blaming the players. They did not make the list. But according to CIF’s own selection requirements, this should not happen.

Quinn Van Doren, Bailey Phan, and Eliana Reynoso were all listed as Second Team All-Avocado League. Based on the stated criteria, they should not have been eligible for All-CIF consideration.

That is not a small technicality. That is a process problem.

MISSED ON MAVS

The two biggest snubs on the list both came from LCC, and it is hard to understand how either was left off — let alone both.

Cambria Williams is, in our opinion, the best goalie in San Diego. Full stop. There is no real argument that justifies giving Goalkeeper of the Year to anyone else.

Her teammate Parker Saari also has every reason to feel overlooked. She was one of the top attackers on one of the best teams in the section and earned First Team All-Avocado League honors.

So to recap: LCC had two First Team All-Avocado players left off, while multiple Second Team All-Avocado players made the All-CIF list.

Make it make sense.

NUMBERS DON’T TRACK

This is where the list gets even harder to justify.

A number of programs had deserving players, but too many teams received extra representation while higher-ranked teams were underrepresented.

How does the No. 2 team in San Diego end up with fewer selections than teams ranked below them? How do the No. 2 and No. 3 teams receive fewer selections than teams ranked No. 4, No. 5, and No. 6 — while being treated similarly to teams ranked in the 7–11 range?

If the argument is that those top teams did not have more deserving players, then one of those coaching staffs should probably be receiving Coach of the Year consideration. Because you cannot have it both ways.

LCC, the No. 2 team, had two major snubs. Add Williams and Saari, and their representation immediately makes more sense.

San Marcos, the No. 3 team, is a little different. Their representation feels relatively fair because they were more of a complete team than a star-heavy roster. But that also brings us back to coaching.

INDIVIDUAL HONORS

We are not going to argue with Sydney Dunn as Player of the Year. She was one of the only two candidates who realistically belonged in that conversation. Alexis Felago also had a strong case, but Sydney ultimately got the job Dunn.

Sorry. Had to.

Goalkeeper of the Year is where the list loses credibility. That honor should have gone to LCC’s Cambria Williams. CIF could reprint the list with that correction alone and the entire thing would make more sense.

Coach of the Year is also confusing. We respect coaches who are grinding with developing programs, but it is hard to justify giving an All-CIF top honor to a Division III program when there were deserving coaches in Open Division, Division I, and Division II.

At some point, strength of schedule and level of competition have to matter.

---

As a whole, CIF needs to take a serious look at how this list is built. When there are obvious inconsistencies — and especially when the stated criteria appear to be ignored — it devalues the honor for everyone.

The athletes deserve better.

The coaches deserve better.

And San Diego girls lacrosse deserves a process that actually adds up.