
Before the first round of the 2025 FCS Playoffs, we released our Behind The Numbers breakdown of all 24 teams in the field, including each team's strengths and weaknesses. You can find descriptions of all the relevant stats used there as well.
It's time to shift our focus to all the quarterfinal games. We took all the data from our Behind the Numbers preview to create direct head-to-head comparisons for every quarterfinal matchup. All statistical rankings are listed 1-24, giving you an idea of where each team ranks in comparison to the rest of the postseason teams.
Below we go behind the numbers of all the quarterfinal matchups of the 2025 FCS Playoffs.
When UC Davis Has The Ball:
| UC Davis | Illinois State |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (6.7 YPP, 8th) | Total Defense (5.5 YPP, 17th) |
| Success Rate (50.3%, 3rd) | Success Rate (43.7%, 24th) |
| Rushing Offense (4.9 YPC, 7th) | Rushing Defense (3.9 YPC, 16th) |
| Passing Offense (8.9 YPA, 6th) | Passing Defense (7.3 YPA, 20th) |
| Turnover Rate (2.2%, 22nd) | Turnovers Forced (2.0%, 17th) |
| RZ TD% (65.1%, 15th) | RZ TD% Allowed (71.1%, 23rd) |
| Pressure Allowed (35%, 21st) | Pressure Rate (37%, 14th) |
| TFL Allowed (6.4%, 6th) | TFL Rate (8.2%, 16th) |
When Illinois State Has The Ball:
| Illinois State | UC Davis |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (5.6 YPP, 20th) | Total Defense (6.0 YPP, 23rd) |
| Success Rate (47.3%, 10th) | Success Rate (42.9%, 23rd) |
| Rushing Offense (4.6 YPC, 17th) | Rushing Defense (4.9 YPC, 24th) |
| Passing Offense (6.9 YPA, 22nd) | Passing Defense (7.2 YPA, 19th) |
| Turnover Rate (1.5%, 12th) | Turnovers Forced (2.1%, 15th) |
| RZ TD% (77.1%, 2nd) | RZ TD% Allowed (67.4%, 18th) |
| Pressure Allowed (19.8%, 3rd) | Pressure Rate (30%, 22nd) |
| TFL Allowed (6.5%, 8th) | TFL Rate (6.9%, 22nd) |
An improbable quarterfinal matchup in Davis, California, gives us a rematch of a playoff game from a year ago, in which UC Davis beat Illinois State 42-10 in the second round. It's projected to be a fun matchup between an Illinois State defense that wrecked the No. 1 offense in the country last weekend and a UC Davis offense that almost always lights up the scoreboard behind Freshman All-American quarterback Caden Pinnick.
I expect this game to be quite different from last season, as both defenses are very different. I think this game starts with how the UC Davis offensive line handles the Illinois State front seven. The Redbirds were incredibly aggressive against NDSU, blitzing on an astonishing 71% of dropbacks, giving Cole Payton no time to throw.
The Illinois State pass rushers did an excellent job of staying disciplined in their rushing lanes, preventing Payton from using his legs effectively. They will need to do the same this weekend against an elusive playmaker in Pinnick. If the Redbirds can generate pressure, they could really create some problems for this UC Davis offense.
Pinnick sometimes holds the ball too long and could put it in dangerous spots. It feels like this will be a key if the Redbirds want to pull off the upset on Saturday. This offense allowed pressure on 36% of Pinnick's dropbacks last weekend against Rhode Island.
However, if Pinnick is able to get time in the pocket, the Redbirds face a far more diverse attack than anything that NDSU was able to show last weekend. Outside of the NDSU game, Illinois State's passing defense has struggled at times, which suggests Pinnick could find success with all his weapons, including Samuel Gbatu Jr. UC Davis could find more success than NDSU did in the second round.
On the other side of the ball, Tommy Rittenhouse will almost certainly need to take much better care of the football. If he does, UC Davis has allowed teams to move the ball through the air and on the ground. I wouldn't be surprised if Illinois State uses ground control again, running the ball frequently.
Expect UC Davis to be more aggressive in its pressure and coverage than NDSU was last week. The Bison hardly blitzed at all, playing a ton of zone coverage. The Aggies were very good in key situations against Rhode Island. They held the Rams to a 33% third-down conversion rate while making two big fourth-down stops.
When Montana State Has The Ball:
| Montana State | Stephen F. Austin |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (6.9 YPP, 4th) | Total Defense (4.1 YPP, 1st) |
| Success Rate (52.7%, 2nd) | Success Rate (32.4%, 3rd) |
| Rushing Offense (5.8 YPC, 4th) | Rushing Defense (2.4 YPC, 2nd) |
| Passing Offense (8.7 YPA, 9th) | Passing Defense (6.0 YPA, 4th) |
| Turnover Rate (1.0%, 5th) | Turnovers Forced (2.7%, 5th) |
| RZ TD% (74.5%, 3rd) | RZ TD% Allowed (51.7%, 7th) |
| Pressure Allowed (28%, 16th) | Pressure Rate (48.4%, 1st) |
| TFL Allowed (6.6%, 9th) | TFL Rate (14.6%, 1st) |
When Stephen F. Austin Has The Ball:
| Stephen F. Austin | Montana State |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (5.6 YPP, 22nd) | Total Defense (4.8 YPP, 9th) |
| Success Rate (46.7%, 12th) | Success Rate (33.7%, 5th) |
| Rushing Offense (4.2 YPC, 21st) | Rushing Defense (3.8 YPC, 13th) |
| Passing Offense (7.3 YPA, 20th) | Passing Defense (5.7 YPA, 2nd) |
| Turnover Rate (1.8%, 18th) | Turnovers Forced (2.4%, 9th) |
| RZ TD% (72.3%, 8th) | RZ TD% Allowed (62.2%, 16th) |
| Pressure Allowed (25.9%, 9th) | Pressure Rate (32.2%, 20th) |
| TFL Allowed (7.3%, 12th) | TFL Rate (8.7%, 13th) |
Stephen F. Austin's passing attack had its best game of the season against a feisty Abilene Christian defense, sparked by outstanding performances by Sam Vidlak and Kylon Harris. Vidlak will need to replicate that performance in his return trip to the state of Montana if the Lumberjacks are going to pull off this upset.
Last week, Stephen F. Austin's offensive line did an excellent job protecting its quarterback, as he was pressured on only 17% of his dropbacks. Wide receiver Kylon Harris and the Stephen F. Austin pass catchers are going to be challenged by one of the best passing defenses in the country. While Stephen F. Austin has some talent at running back, this game could come down to how well this passing attack performs against Montana State's defense.
On the other side, I believe we find the biggest x-factor of this entire game. Can Stephen F. Austin find a way to slow down the Montana State rushing attack? Julius Davis and Adams Jones are a deadly 1-2 punch, along with the legs of quarterback Justin Lamson. The Lumberjacks have one of the best rushing defenses in the country, holding opponents to 2.4 yards per carry. The defensive line is big and athletic, which has allowed them to force a ton of negative plays.
However, both times Stephen F. Austin played Abilene Christian, the Lumberjacks gave up a lot of rushing yards and some explosive plays. Is it possible that the Lumberjacks haven't faced a ton of great rushing attacks? If Stephen F. Austin can hold this rushing attack in check, forcing Montana State into passing situations, I think they can make this a low-scoring game and have a chance to win it.
This is important because SFA has a ton of talent in the secondary and should feel great about the matchup against Montana State's wide receivers. Despite all of that, I do think this is the best rushing attack the Lumberjacks have seen all season. If they struggle to slow down the run, Montana State's RPO offense will heat up and score at a level the SFA offense may not be able to match.
When Tarleton State Has The Ball:
| Tarleton State | Villanova |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (6.8 YPP, 7th) | Total Defense (5.6 YPP, 18th) |
| Success Rate (47.7%, 8th) | Success Rate (38.1%, 13th) |
| Rushing Offense (5.1 YPC, 6th) | Rushing Defense (4.0 YPC, 17th) |
| Passing Offense (9.3 YPA, 2nd) | Passing Defense (7.3 YPA, 21st) |
| Turnover Rate (0.8%, 2nd) | Turnovers Forced (1.6%, 23rd) |
| RZ TD% (72.4%, 7th) | RZ TD% Allowed (62.9%, 17th) |
| Pressure Allowed (21.8%, 5th) | Pressure Rate (36.8%, 15th) |
| TFL Allowed (9.5%, 22nd) | TFL Rate (7.7%, 20th) |
When Villanova Has The Ball:
| Villanova | Tarleton State |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (6.2 YPP, 12th) | Total Defense (5.2 YPP, 14th) |
| Success Rate (47.5%, 9th) | Success Rate (39.1%, 16th) |
| Rushing Offense (4.8 YPC, 13th) | Rushing Defense (4.4 YPC, 21st) |
| Passing Offense (8.0 YPA, 14th) | Passing Defense (6.6 YPA, 11th) |
| Turnover Rate (0.7%, 1st) | Turnovers Forced (4.8%, 1st) |
| RZ TD% (62.5%, 16th) | RZ TD% Allowed (44.8%, 2nd) |
| Pressure Allowed (21.8%, 5th) | Pressure Rate (42.3%, 9th) |
| TFL Allowed (10.6%, 24th) | TFL Rate (12.2%, 4th) |
Villanova's defense was excellent in situational football last week, leading the Wildcats to a win over Lehigh. The Wildcats will have to do that again this week if they want to pull off the upset. Last week, they held Villanova scoreless on three red zone possessions, including a game-winning fumble on the final drive.
Tarleton State showed last week that if you can limit explosive plays, they can stumble in the red zone. The problem for North Dakota was that, eventually, Tarleton State generated a ton of explosive plays, with Victor Gabalis connecting on several passes over the top.
The Villanova offense faces a more athletic, talented secondary than it did last week. Pat McQuaide has done an excellent job protecting the football and will need to continue that against a Tarleton State defense that leads the country in turnovers forced.
In this game, Villanova needs to find success on the ground. The Wildcats only managed 27 rushing yards on 27 attempts against Lehigh. The Texans' rushing defense has been hit-or-miss, but was excellent against North Dakota in the second round. Outside of two explosive runs, the Texans held a good North Dakota rushing attack to 2.5 yards per carry.
On paper, I believe this is the most lopsided matchup of the week, as I'm not sure Villanova has the firepower to score with Tarleton State. However, Villanova has a scrappy, veteran group that has defied the odds throughout this playoff run. If Villanova can turn this into an ugly, low-scoring game, the Wildcats are going to have a chance.
When Montana Has The Ball:
| Montana | South Dakota |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (6.8 YPP, 9th) | Total Defense (5.7 YPP, 20th) |
| Success Rate (44.7%, 18th) | Success Rate (42.7%, 21st) |
| Rushing Offense (4.9 YPC, 11th) | Rushing Defense (4.3 YPC, 19th) |
| Passing Offense (8.7 YPA, 7th) | Passing Defense (7.5 YPA, 22nd) |
| Turnover Rate (1.5%, 10th) | Turnovers Forced (1.5%, 24th) |
| RZ TD% (80%, 1st) | RZ TD% Allowed (68.2%, 20th) |
| Pressure Allowed (28%, 16th) | Pressure Rate (29.3%, 23rd) |
| TFL Allowed (8.0%, 18th) | TFL Rate (5.42%, 24th) |
When South Dakota Has The Ball:
| South Dakota | Montana |
|---|---|
| Total Offense (5.9 YPP, 15th) | Total Defense (5.7 YPP, 22nd) |
| Success Rate (46.6%, 15th) | Success Rate (37.4%, 11th) |
| Rushing Offense (4.9 YPC, 8th) | Rushing Defense (4.2 YPC, 18th) |
| Passing Offense (7.5 YPA, 16th) | Passing Defense (7.2 YPA, 18th) |
| Turnover Rate (1.2%, 8th) | Turnovers Forced (2.6%, 6th) |
| RZ TD% (57.5%, 21st) | RZ TD% Allowed (56%, 13th) |
| Pressure Allowed (35.6%, 23rd) | Pressure Rate (32.2%, 19th) |
| TFL Allowed (6.5%, 7th) | TFL Rate (7.9%, 18th) |
This is one game where we may have to throw out some of the season-long statistics. Montana had some inconsistent performances during the year, but has always shown up in the biggest games. On the other hand, South Dakota has been playing at an elite level over the past few weeks. Despite Montana dominating SDSU in the second round, South Dakota is a much more intriguing matchup.
First of all, South Dakota's offense has found its stride, becoming the potent offense we have seen in the past two seasons. The Coyotes averaged nearly 10 yards per play on the road last week against Mercer. It's clear what the game plan will be for South Dakota. Set the tone with the power run game with L.J. Phillips Jr., then hit the deep shots to Larenzo Fenner.
South Dakota features a much more downhill approach in its blocking scheme and in how L.J. Phillips Jr. runs the ball than SDSU does. There's a chance for the Coyotes to wear down this undersized but athletic defensive line for Montana. SDSU never committed to the run, but I expect South Dakota to be much more patient. Montana State had more success against the Grizzlies as the game went on. The Bobcats averaged nearly six yards per carry in that matchup.
If the ground game does find success, there might not be a better quarterback in the FCS than Aidan Bouman when it comes to connecting on deep shots off play action. Bouman had nine play-action attempts last week, going 7-of-9 for 161 yards and two touchdowns on 18 yards per attempt. The Montana secondary likes to be aggressive, leading to a ton of pass breakups, but it can also lead to some explosive plays. Whichever team wins this battle will have a significant advantage in this game.
On the other side of the ball, I want to zero in on Keali'i Ah Yat and these talented Montana wide receivers against a solid South Dakota secondary. One thing to watch will be how well Montana keeps Ah Yat clean in the pocket. The Coyotes generated pressure on 33% of drop-backs last week, but throughout the whole season, they have not done it consistently.
Montana's offensive line has been fairly solid in pass blocking outside of two games. Last week, Ah Yat was only pressured six times on 38 drop-backs. He was brilliant last week, along with Michael Wortham and Brooks Davis. Ah Yat hit seven of his 10 throws that went 10 or more yards downfield for 168 yards and three touchdowns.
For South Dakota's secondary, the Coyotes have been playing much better, but this will be their toughest test of the season since the NDSU game. Of course, all of that becomes nearly impossible if they can't slow down Eli Gillman, who is one of the best players in the country. I expect both offenses to find quite a bit of success in this game, and it may come down to which defense can force a key turnover or get a crucial stop in the red zone or on third down.
More must-reads:
+
Get the latest news and rumors, customized to your favorite sports and teams. Emailed daily. Always free!