Really?

I think those sites that offer their free picks and analysis must be trying to give bad picks. As in, they're fronts for the gambling sites pushing players to bad bets. At the very least, do you really think 'winnersandwhiners' has time to do a thorough analysis of 100+ games today? 'Bangthebook' picked whoever is playing VCU to not only cover but win outright. I said to myself 'Okay, that seems unlikely'. Then the next one I looked at was St Thomas vs North Dakota. This is what 'Bangthebook' says, "We have this one finishing with a projected score of 91-58 in favor of the Fighting Hawks. Not only will North Dakota pick up the win, but look for them to cover at +5.5." Really? You expect a 5.5 point dog to win by 33 points? Why haven't you mortgaged your house and gone to Vegas, because that looks like the biggest lock in history. Or do you routinely find lines off by 38 points, in which case why aren't you wealthy and retired? My streak survivor pick today is St Thomas, boldly going against the prediction they lose by 33...

Also, nothing personal, but some of the analysis provided by Covers' experts is headshakingly bad. I read one that said 'Team x beat team y last time out, expect the same here'. Sure, because that's how it works. Just look at the previous game and assume the same thing will happen again. Weird, because I have NBA teams in back-to-back revenge games at 13-7 ats this season...

I don't post picks often, but when I do they are winners.

As for 'Bangtheboook', if they aren't deliberately giving bad picks, they must have no human involvement in what they post or in looking at the results of their 'model'. Because a human would look at a projection that differs from the line by 39 points and say 'That isn't right'.