Three Attackers Beat One Star: Arizona State Sweeps Stanford 3-0

Set three, Stanford led 24-23. One more point and the match would stretch to a fourth set, and the No. 8 team in the country would have another chance to turn things around. In the stands at San Luis Obispo, the cheering swelled toward the red jerseys. Then Arizona State held serve, stuffed an attack on the right pin, leveled at 24-24, and closed the set with a cross-court finish. The score read 26-24. The full match: 25-19, 25-21, 26-24. A 3-0 win over Stanford. Arizona State's fourth ranked win in only four matches this season. I rewatched the tape three times, and what made me stop was not any single spike, but the way this team distributes the ball. NCAA women's volleyball runs on a different rhythm from the international competitions Vietnamese audiences usually watch. The season begins in the fall, with teams playing a run of non-conference tournaments before conference play starts. This is the phase for testing lineups, building RPI numbers, and above all collecting wins over ranked opponents — the currency that carries real weight in a postseason selection file. In the NCAA, not every team has a fixed berth through its conference. A selection committee evaluates the whole season, and the count of ranked wins is a key indicator. That is why coaching staffs deliberately schedule strong opponents early — accepting the risk of a loss in exchange for a chance to bank wins with weight. The San Luis Obispo Classic belongs to that category. Arizona State arrived after a previous tournament, and after a memorable loss to unranked UC Davis. That blemish showed the team's ceiling is high but its floor is not yet stable. Stanford was the opposite: a traditional program, ranked No. 8, but beaten in three of its last four matches and still groping for rhythm. For Arizona State, this was a chance to prove the UC Davis loss was an accident and that the run of wins over strong teams is the real thing. For Stanford, it was a test of whether the ranking still reflects form or is merely early-season inertia. This season carries its own signature: ranked teams keep falling, to the point that Vanderbilt claimed a first win over a ranked opponent. That parity makes every non-conference match heavier. Reading the box score, I see a familiar pattern in modern women's volleyball: the winning team is not the one with the brightest star, but the one with the most threats. Arizona State pushed three hitters to 14 kills or more. Aniya Clinton, a graduate outside hitter, scored 15 kills at a .522 hitting percentage — an efficiency anyone who has followed collegiate women's volleyball knows is very hard to sustain across a match. Noemie Glover, at opposite, leads the team for the season with 126 kills. Una Vajagic, a junior outside hitter who transferred from Wisconsin to Tempe this summer, has 124 season kills; in this match she posted double-digit kills, double-digit digs, and a direct service ace. Three players, three directions. The opposing block cannot load up in one place. Behind them is Elle Mottola, a freshman setter, with 45 assists — a career high for the young player, and her second match this season above 40. A freshman setter running a balanced offense at this level is notable, and also a concern if she dips. On the other side, Jordyn Harvey scored 18 kills, a match high, at .455 on 33 attempts. That was a night of high-class play. But her team still lost. When one attacker has to carry the whole offense, the opposing block can read where the ball is going in the key rotations. Set one made that plain: Arizona State out-hit Stanford 15-10. Not because they hit harder, but because the ball was shared more evenly. The block was the other piece. Arizona State recorded 12 blocks across the match — a wall thick enough to turn Stanford's pin attacks into high balls. In set three, the visitors scored 22 kills, a burst of offense after falling behind at set point. To win a set when the opponent has already reached set point, a team must change its serving rhythm or change its distribution target. From the tape, I lean toward both happening. One detail made me stop. The original report credited Clinton and Glover with "31.5 of Arizona State's 65 points." But the scores 25-19, 25-21, 26-24 add up to 76 points for that team. The two figures do not reconcile. Likewise, the piece refers to "the 2026 season" and "four matches into this season" in a way that forces readers to infer which season is current. With more than forty years in this work, I take it as a reminder: even published data needs cross-checking before it is cited. Those blemishes do not change the larger picture. What matters is how Arizona State was built. Head coach JJ Van Niel has 20 ranked wins in four seasons, six of them against top-10 teams. Last season the program set a record with eight ranked wins. Four matches into this season, it already has four. That is a trajectory, not a momentary peak. The roster construction is modern too: a seasoned graduate attacker (Clinton), a freshman setter entrusted with real responsibility (Mottola), and a pickup from the NCAA transfer portal (Vajagic from Wisconsin). This is the model rising programs use to close the gap with traditional powers — and in Tempe, it is working. Since 2026, I have followed and told the stories of women's sports through the Binh Duong Sports Her channel, so I have a habit of watching a match through one question: who is given a chance, and who is left behind. Based on my experience following matches, a three-pronged offense does not appear by itself — it is the result of trusting young players and daring to share the ball with them. People will say Arizona State has "transformed," that it has "risen to a new level." I will not go that far. Their balance is real, but it needs to be read correctly. The two leading attackers still account for nearly half of the recorded points. This is three threats, not an absolute even split. And the loss to UC Davis — an unranked team — shows the floor is considerably lower than the ceiling. A freshman setter is a wonderful engine, but also a variable: she can erupt, and she can dip. For Stanford, the problem runs deeper than one loss. Harvey hit .455, scored 18 kills, and still lost. When an individual plays at the highest level and the collective cannot keep up, that is a structural signal, not bad luck. The No. 8 ranking may be higher than this team's current strength. I once sat in the stands applauding; now I sit at the commentary desk so others do not have to applaud alone. Equality does not mean everyone reaches the finish line the same way; it means everyone gets a fair starting line. In women's volleyball, that translates to: do not make one person carry the whole offense. Arizona State is teaching that lesson with three names instead of one. The court does not ask your gender, only whether you dare to stand up. For Vietnamese women's volleyball — where I follow every match — the question left behind is not whether we lack a star, but whether we already have three attacking options so we no longer depend on one.