Arizona State sweep Stanford 3-0: When three hitters peak together, one attacker cannot carry the match

Late in the third set, the score read 24-23 in Stanford's favor, the ball in Jordyn Harvey's hands. One more kill and the Cardinal would have set point. But the ball bounced off Arizona State's block and returned to the court in Palo Alto heading in a different direction. Minutes later, Arizona State won 26-24, closing out the match 25-19, 25-21, 26-24. Neither team won more than two sets.

I watched the match tape three times. The first time, I only saw Harvey: 18 kills, a .455 hitting percentage on 33 attempts, the match high. But by the third viewing, I realized the real story lay elsewhere. This match was not about a star being shut down; it was about a team that learned to spread the weight across three pairs of shoulders.

Arizona State, ranked 12th nationally, defeated 8th-ranked Stanford in the San Luis Obispo Classic. This was Arizona State's fourth win over a ranked opponent this season. Last season, that number was eight, a program record. Four matches, four ranked wins, and the season has only just begun.

To understand why this matters, you have to place the match in the context of NCAA Division I women's volleyball. September is the non-conference slate, where teams build their resumes for the postseason. A win over Stanford, even a struggling Stanford, carries significant weight in the eyes of the selection committee. Arizona State deliberately scheduled Texas, Minnesota, Oregon, and Stanford. This is how a rising program builds its brand.

But what caught my attention was not the result; it was how Arizona State achieved it. Three of their hitters reached 14 or more kills: Aniya Clinton with 15 kills and a match-high .522 hitting percentage; Noemie Glover with 126 kills, leading the team for the season; and Una Vajagic with 124 kills, just two behind Glover. Last season, Arizona State's top two scorers had a clear gap between them. This year, they are nearly tied.

This is the crux. Arizona State's balanced attacking approach defeated Stanford's single-point dependency. Harvey had an outstanding night, but she could not carry her team alone. In the first set, Arizona State out-hit Stanford 15-10 in kills. That gap was no accident; it reflected a structural problem in how Stanford distributes its offense.

I have spent years following volleyball matches, and I have seen this pattern many times. When a team depends too heavily on one attacker, the opposing block can key on her in crucial moments. Harvey scored 18 points, but in the third set, when Stanford needed her most, Arizona State's block found a way. This was not bad luck; it was a structural warning.

Arizona State's setter, Elle Mottola, is only a freshman. She recorded a career-high 45 assists, her second 40-plus assist match of the season. A freshman running a balanced offense at this level is a game-changer. But it is also a risk. I have seen many freshmen burn out, and Mottola's consistency will determine whether Arizona State sustains its upward trajectory.

Arizona State also recorded 12 blocks in the match, more than Stanford. Their block was not just defense; it was part of the attacking strategy. When the block dominates, the opponent is forced to attack into easier-to-defend positions, creating counterattack opportunities for Arizona State. This is a positive feedback loop that Stanford could not break.

I spoke with a college volleyball coach a few years ago, and he told me that "balance is the secret weapon of rising programs." He was not talking about perfect balance; he was talking about having three threats instead of one. Arizona State has three threats. Stanford has one.

Stanford is in a transition phase. Three losses in four matches show a program searching for itself. The number 8 ranking may reflect the past more than the present. But I do not want to turn Stanford into a story of failure. Harvey had an outstanding night, and Stanford's problem is not a lack of talent; it is a lack of offensive depth.

Arizona State, on the other hand, is building a sustainable program. Head coach JJ Van Niel has 20 ranked wins in four seasons, including six against top-10 teams. This is not a one-time surge; this is a trend. The program is on the rise, and the Stanford match was just a milestone on that journey.

I also want to mention Una Vajagic, who transferred from Wisconsin this summer. She scored 124 kills and recorded double-digit digs. The NCAA transfer portal has allowed Arizona State to add proven talent, and Vajagic is a prime example. This is how rising programs close the gap with traditional powers.

But Arizona State is not without risks. The loss to UC Davis, an unranked team, in the previous tournament showed that this team can falter. Mottola is still a freshman, and her consistency will be tested in the weeks to come. The match against Cal Poly on September 18 will be a test of Arizona State's focus.

I have learned a great deal from following rising programs. They do not always win, but they have a system, and that system creates consistency. Arizona State has a system. Stanford is searching for its own.

As I left the broadcast room after the match, I thought about what the college volleyball coach told me about balance. Arizona State does not have one brightest star; they have three stars shining together. And in volleyball, as in many sports, that is often how smaller teams defeat larger ones.

Stanford will have its chance to rebound. They have Harvey, and they have tradition. But Arizona State has shown that tradition is not the only weapon on the court. Sometimes, it is patience, spreading the weight, and trusting three pairs of shoulders instead of one.