Exclusive $35 Bonus
CODE: COVERS35
Free College Football Expert and Computer Picks For Every Game Sept. 17, 2026
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20.39 |
+10.5 -110 |
o50.5 -120 |
+350 |
|
|
31.76 |
-10.5 +100 |
u51.5 -110 |
-385 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
39.12 |
-20.5 -110 |
o56.0 -112 |
-1408 |
|
|
19.05 |
+20.5 -105 |
u56.5 -109 |
+1050 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
23.46 |
+8.5 -110 |
o52.5 -110 |
+260 |
|
|
31.03 |
-8.5 -106 |
u53.5 -113 |
-315 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
26.20 |
+6.5 -143 |
o56.5 -115 |
+165 |
|
|
31.36 |
-6.5 +117 |
u57.5 -110 |
-190 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
31.58 |
+2.5 +105 |
o62.5 +100 |
+135 |
|
|
33.31 |
-2.5 -110 |
u63.5 -115 |
-145 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
28.77 |
-4.5 -125 |
o50.5 -109 |
-200 |
|
|
24.66 |
+4.5 +105 |
u50.5 -102 |
+175 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
2.28 |
+52.5 -108 |
o58.5 -115 |
-- |
|
|
56.26 |
-52.5 -105 |
u60.5 -125 |
-- |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
19.42 |
+3.5 -115 |
o42.5 -126 |
+145 |
|
|
22.29 |
-3.5 +100 |
u43.5 -108 |
-160 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
4.09 |
+41.5 -110 |
o49.5 -110 |
+25000 |
|
|
45.39 |
-41.5 -102 |
u50.5 -110 |
-- |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
41.18 |
-24.5 -110 |
o54.0 -113 |
-3000 |
|
|
16.36 |
+24.5 -105 |
u54.5 -110 |
+1550 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
9.18 |
+24.5 -120 |
o43.5 -105 |
+1600 |
|
|
34.01 |
-24.5 +100 |
u44.5 -115 |
-2500 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
13.70 |
+20.5 -105 |
o49.5 -108 |
+1000 |
|
|
36.22 |
-20.5 -110 |
u50.5 -113 |
-1400 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
13.74 |
+23.5 -105 |
o48.5 -115 |
+1600 |
|
|
36.68 |
-23.5 -110 |
u49.5 -112 |
-2500 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
10.87 |
+24.5 -120 |
o44.5 -115 |
+1400 |
|
|
33.55 |
-24.5 +100 |
u45.5 -110 |
-2400 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
24.56 |
+3.5 -115 |
o49.5 -120 |
+140 |
|
|
28.43 |
-3.5 +105 |
u51.5 -140 |
-150 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
17.13 |
+1.5 -115 |
o38.5 -108 |
-105 |
|
|
19.49 |
-1.5 -105 |
u38.5 -110 |
+105 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
21.33 |
+6.5 -115 |
o50.5 -110 |
+190 |
|
|
29.36 |
-6.5 -105 |
u50.5 -108 |
-210 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
13.80 |
+29.5 -135 |
o56.5 -110 |
+2500 |
|
|
44.00 |
-29.5 +110 |
u57.5 -113 |
-4000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
40.90 |
-21.5 -112 |
o59.5 +100 |
-1493 |
|
|
18.80 |
+21.5 -108 |
u59.5 -108 |
+1300 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
6.65 |
+36.5 -110 |
o48.5 -105 |
+7000 |
|
|
40.74 |
-36.5 -110 |
u49.5 -112 |
-20000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
15.07 |
+19.5 -105 |
o48.5 -110 |
+1000 |
|
|
34.91 |
-19.5 -108 |
u49.5 -115 |
-1205 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
29.15 |
+2.5 -126 |
o58.5 -125 |
+105 |
|
|
31.13 |
-2.5 -105 |
u59.5 -110 |
-120 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
17.57 |
+16.5 -110 |
o49.5 -109 |
+550 |
|
|
34.22 |
-16.5 -110 |
u50.5 -115 |
-699 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
17.05 |
+17.5 -115 |
o49.5 -110 |
+680 |
|
|
35.65 |
-17.5 +100 |
u50.5 -110 |
-800 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
18.42 |
+19.5 -110 |
o51.5 +100 |
+800 |
|
|
36.67 |
-19.5 -110 |
u52.5 -115 |
-901 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
16.95 |
+14.5 -110 |
o49.0 -110 |
+540 |
|
|
31.94 |
-14.5 +100 |
u50.5 -115 |
-600 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
19.56 |
+10.5 -110 |
o48.5 -145 |
+325 |
|
|
30.92 |
-10.5 +100 |
u51.5 -118 |
-390 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
7.65 |
+45.5 -127 |
o59.5 -110 |
+17500 |
|
|
55.27 |
-45.5 +102 |
u61.5 -118 |
-- |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
26.82 |
+6.5 -149 |
o58.5 -109 |
+160 |
|
|
31.88 |
-6.5 +120 |
u59.5 -125 |
-175 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
17.10 |
+18.5 -115 |
o51.5 -110 |
+800 |
|
|
36.41 |
-18.5 -105 |
u52.0 -115 |
-1099 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
28.35 |
+6.5 +102 |
o62.0 -110 |
+230 |
|
|
33.90 |
-6.5 -115 |
u62.5 -106 |
-250 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
22.93 |
+3.5 -122 |
o47.5 -135 |
+125 |
|
|
26.58 |
-3.5 +105 |
u49.5 -115 |
-140 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
28.15 |
-3.5 -113 |
o52.5 -105 |
-178 |
|
|
25.36 |
+3.5 -105 |
u53.5 -113 |
+165 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
27.71 |
-2.5 -108 |
o52.5 -110 |
-120 |
|
|
25.53 |
+2.5 -109 |
u53.5 -110 |
+115 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
26.58 |
-8.5 -112 |
o43.5 -112 |
-340 |
|
|
16.70 |
+8.5 -105 |
u43.5 -102 |
+300 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
21.55 |
+6.5 +105 |
o48.5 -115 |
+225 |
|
|
29.42 |
-6.5 -120 |
u49.5 -114 |
-250 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
25.94 |
-3.5 -109 |
o50.0 -110 |
-172 |
|
|
23.56 |
+3.5 -105 |
u50.5 -105 |
+160 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
22.93 |
+3.5 -112 |
o52.5 -110 |
+145 |
|
|
27.07 |
-3.5 +100 |
u53.5 -115 |
-155 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
11.74 |
+27.5 -110 |
o49.5 -110 |
+2000 |
|
|
38.91 |
-27.5 -102 |
u50.5 -110 |
-4500 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
29.08 |
-2.5 -119 |
o54.5 -110 |
-147 |
|
|
26.40 |
+2.5 -104 |
u54.5 -108 |
+140 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
17.11 |
+18.5 -110 |
o49.5 -124 |
+775 |
|
|
34.65 |
-18.5 -105 |
u50.5 -110 |
-1000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
29.67 |
+1.5 -143 |
o57.0 -110 |
-130 |
|
|
28.24 |
-1.5 +115 |
u59.5 -140 |
+115 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
11.46 |
+30.5 -115 |
o51.5 -126 |
+2500 |
|
|
41.56 |
-30.5 -105 |
u53.5 -110 |
-4000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
21.52 |
+5.5 -140 |
o47.5 -115 |
+150 |
|
|
26.14 |
-5.5 +114 |
u48.5 -115 |
-170 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20.91 |
+10.5 -110 |
o53.5 -110 |
+325 |
|
|
32.45 |
-10.5 -104 |
u54.0 -111 |
-360 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
28.81 |
+0.0 -156 |
o53.5 -110 |
-145 |
|
|
26.56 |
+0.0 +125 |
u54.5 -115 |
+126 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
13.24 |
+22.5 -110 |
o46.5 -109 |
+1300 |
|
|
33.51 |
-22.5 -110 |
u46.5 -108 |
-2000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
35.29 |
-16.5 -130 |
o52.5 -105 |
-952 |
|
|
19.11 |
+16.5 -102 |
u53.5 -110 |
+750 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
12.89 |
+35.5 -112 |
o59.5 -102 |
+5000 |
|
|
48.06 |
-35.5 +105 |
u60.5 -128 |
-50000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
15.60 |
+30.5 -105 |
o58.0 -109 |
+3000 |
|
|
44.74 |
-30.5 -105 |
u58.5 -115 |
-5000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
24.45 |
+8.5 -110 |
o55.5 -115 |
+260 |
|
|
32.98 |
-8.5 +105 |
u56.5 -110 |
-310 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
17.93 |
+20.5 -115 |
o56.0 -110 |
+850 |
|
|
37.81 |
-20.5 -105 |
u57.5 -115 |
-1100 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
24.74 |
+2.5 -113 |
o46.5 -112 |
+110 |
|
|
24.81 |
-2.5 -106 |
u47.5 -115 |
-125 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
6.68 |
+34.5 -105 |
o49.5 -110 |
+5000 |
|
|
41.98 |
-34.5 -105 |
u50.5 -110 |
-20000 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
38.81 |
-27.5 -108 |
o50.5 -110 |
-5000 |
|
|
12.97 |
+27.5 +100 |
u51.5 -111 |
+2500 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
27.27 |
-6.5 -110 |
o49.5 -110 |
-235 |
|
|
21.33 |
+6.5 -104 |
u50.0 -110 |
+215 |
Predicted Score
Team |
Predicted Score |
Spread |
Total |
ML |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
20.13 |
+14.5 -115 |
o52.5 -108 |
+500 |
|
|
33.97 |
-14.5 +100 |
u53.5 -115 |
-625 |
The first-half Under has cashed in eight of Syracuse's previous 11 games, and Pittsburgh will establish the run early in this game because it gave up seven sacks against the Orange last year.
The Orange have more experience on defense, and their head coach, Fran Brown, has a defensive pedigree. The Under has cashed in seven of the last eight Syracuse-Pittsburgh meetings.
The Demon Deacons' first-half spread is good down to 10.5 because they have covered the first-half spread in 10 of their last 12 games and the Hurricanes can wear them down and pull away in the second half since they are a more physical team.
I lean toward the Under at 54.5 or higher. These teams are 4-0 to the Over this season and Wake Forest just gave up 36 points to Purdue last week. I prefer fading the market and recent results rather than following them. Miami ranks 107th nationally in seconds per play and 28 of the 69 points in Wake Forest's game against Purdue last week were scored in double overtime.
Although Will Hammond has been rusty in his return from a torn ACL, Texas Tech was able to put 35 on the board last week on the road in the pouring rain. And Houston's pass defense (81st in EPA per play) is actually worse than Oregon State's (69th). Tech's offensive line (which has allowed just five pressures) will be the key to a big scoring performance under the Friday night lights.
Between Houston's offensive continuity - seventh nationally in returning offensive production (71%) - and its defensive struggles, this game sets up well for the Over. The Cougars' defense is 81st in EPA per pass and 96th in early-down EPA, and takes on a Texas Tech team with one of the best O-lines in the country. But the Cougars should score, too, with their offense sitting second in success rate (61.2%).
I absolutely love Texas State at home against North Texas this weekend. Despite its 0-2 record, Texas State is far better than its record shows. The Bobcats put up nearly 350 total yards against Texas in Week 1 and outgained UTSA by nearly 100 yards in Week 2. Unfortunately, three turnovers in each game helped lead to both losses. I expect the Bobcats to clean that up against a North Texas team coming off a massive win over UNLV. I also think people will put too much weight on North Texas’ recent success. Trust the kitties!
Bill Belichick has UNC running the late-career Patriot offense--control the ball, avoid mistakes and kick field goals. Both teams rank in the 120s or lower in explosiveness on offense.
I wouldn't go any higher, but I'd stick with Clemson at this probability. Any higher, and I'd surrender the 3.5 points and go spread instead. The Tigers should see a spark in their offense with a new quarterback as well as an injury to one of UNC's top pass rushers.
I expect this game to go Under, mostly because I don't expect the Arkansas offense to score a touchdown. I've outlined the backing for a prop like this throughout the article: the trenches, Arkansas's defensive numbers, and the general malaise around the Razorbacks program. However, there's more.
The Georgia offense is humming. It just dropped 70 points against Western Kentucky, and QB Gunnar Stockton has eight touchdown passes with zero interceptions over two games. Meanwhile, Utah just scored 43 against the Razorbacks. That's a team that ranks 22nd in SP+. What's a team that ranks first going to do?
This has "Georgia goes up two scores, and Kirby Smart runs his backfield into the ground, physically dominating Arkansas in the process" written all over it. In the process, the clock should run and run...and run. I like the Under to 52.5 because of that.
I already mentioned the issues Arkansas is likely to face in the trenches, but the other side of the ball is what really drives this home. I don't expect the Razorbacks to move the ball much at all. The only offensive metric of any substance that it ranks above triple digits in is third/fourth-down success. A big product of that? The volume and finding itself there often because it's been so ineffective on other downs.
Good down to +21.5. USC's mediocre defense allowed both San Jose State (26 points, 6.0 yards per play) and Louisiana (30 points, 6.9 YPP) to find offensive success, so a back door cover will be live for KJ Duff and this Rutgers offense.
Heisman candidate Jayden Maiava (10.8 yards per attempt) will have success throwing the ball around against a Rutgers defense that doesn't put pressure on the quarterback, ranking 124th in PFF's pass-rushing grade. Rutgers has the ability to hit chunk plays (26th in explosiveness) with reliable offensive coordinator Kirk Ciarrocca calling the shots.
A great combo leg here: The Crimson Tide comes out hot early and owns the entire first half. They likely won't let up in this matchup, but expect them to come out looking to smack the Seminoles in the mouth after last year's embarrassment.
Florida State’s defense has been far from impressive through the first two weeks, and that could spell trouble against Alabama. The Seminoles allowed over 319 total yards to New Mexico State before nearly surrendering 600 total yards to SMU. Alabama has the offensive firepower to take advantage, and I expect the Crimson Tide to carry the bulk of the scoring in this matchup. However, if Alabama reaches 40 points, Florida State should have opportunities to do some damage in garbage time. I’m expecting a 40-10 final score, which would put the Seminoles in position to contribute enough late.
I keep coming back to SMU’s 27-24 win over Florida State. The Mustangs racked up nearly 600 total yards, outgaining the Seminoles by 261 yards despite turning the ball over four times. Their defense also impressed, holding Florida State to just 4-for-19 on third and fourth down combined. With a few weeks under their belt, I expect SMU to clean up the early mistakes that plagued them in Week 1. I like the Mustangs in this spot against Louisville.
Playable to 55%.
The biggest weakness for both Florida and Auburn is their offensive line.
Florida lost three starters from 2025, making Saturday's game a tough test for a group that doesn't have a lot of on-field experience together. Auburn lost their entire offensive line from 2025, putting them in a similarly difficult spot against a formidable Florida pass rush. Auburn aggressively hit the portal to rebuild the trenches this past offseason, but there are likely to be growing pains for their offensive line against good defenses.
Young quarterbacks tend to struggle under pressure. If neither offensive line can offer consistently clean pockets this weekend, points could be at a premium for both Florida and Auburn.
Playable to 51%.
On the surface, Auburn may appear to be a weaker team because they struggled with Baylor, but the more shrewd takeaway from that game should be that Baylor might be better than many pundits expected. In Week 2, Baylor outgained Prairie View by 442 total yards, allowing only 7 first downs in a 44-3 victory. The final score could have been uglier after Baylor led 34-3 at the half, but they chose to take the air out of the ball late in the game.
Florida and Auburn both have question marks heading into Week 3. The home team getting points is the better value for bettors, especially considering they have already been tested by a real opponent in 2026.
It's important to pay attention to maket moves from the prior week. South Alabama took money last week vs Tulane. They went on to cover and should have won outright, so that was a bit of a misleading final. On top of that, Ohio had money go against them last week and went on to win a game they shouldn't have in four OTs after being outgained by over 200 yards. I think this line could close closer to six.
LSU-Ole Miss has all the makings of absolute mayhem. Lane Kiffin returns to Oxford for the first time since leaving the Rebels for LSU, and you already know the Ole Miss faithful will have plenty to say. Add in Kiffin’s love for the villain role, a hostile environment and uncertainty surrounding LSU quarterback Sam Leavitt, and I want no part of picking a side. I want points. Both teams have plenty of motivation, and I expect this matchup to play at a fast pace with plenty of scoring opportunities. I grabbed the over at 58.5, but 57.5 is still available.
LSU’s dominating performance versus Clemson in Week 1 might not prove to be overly impressive considering Clemson might be lucky to make a bowl game this year.
Also, LSU quarterback Sam Leavitt has quietly thrown four interceptions already this season. Obviously, multiple turnovers is not a recipe for success on the road.
Notre Dame is 9-3 ATS against current Big Ten teams under Marcus Freeman and 5-0 ATS if you remove Ohio State and USC from that equation. This is exactly Notre Dame's wheelhouse, and even a mucked-up first half against Wisconsin didn't stop the Irish from covering a three-touchdown spread. Meanwhile, Michigan State is 2-0 after taking down Toledo and EMU from the MAC, but the rushing attack that carried the Spartans to those victories will fall flat against an Irish defense that ranks 10th in opponent yards per carry.
Texas is coming off a massive comeback against top-ranked Ohio State and has Tennessee waiting next weekend, creating a potential lookahead spot against UTSA. The Longhorns also enter Week 3 with some unnecessary off-the-field distractions surrounding Steve Sarkisian and Arch Manning. Meanwhile, UTSA is coming off a 31-26 win over Texas State, in which the Roadrunners nearly reached 400 total yards while committing zero turnovers. Texas should have enough talent to build an early lead, but I expect the Longhorns to take their foot off the gas with SEC play looming. Trust UTSA to keep this within 30.
Purdue is improved in year two under head coach Barry Odom. Last week they nearly pulled a small upset at home versus Wake Forest before losing by two.
Wake Forest converted a 4th-and-15 in the second overtime. Change that one unlikely conversion and Purdue enters this game 2-0. You have to ask would the Boilermakers still be catching more than two touchdowns here? I have my doubts.
Purdue dropped 455 total yards and 29 first downs on a good Wake Forest defense in Week 2. The market isn't giving enough respect to Fame Ijeboi's dominance at running back and how he opens up the passing attack.
Our experts and prediction models are hard at work analyzing the data. Check back shortly for today's picks, or explore our Computer Picks for inspiration.
The table above lets you know how profitable and helpful our sports betting computer picks have been across the last 100 college football games played. Our NCAAF computer picks use expert data to review odds and generate moneyline, spread, and total bets for every game throughout the season.
Listed in the table are unit details, which show the total profit or loss based on a bettor placing $100 on each of the last 100 college football picks made by the computer, on both the opening and closing lines.
Take advantage of these free college football picks before you wager any money at sportsbooks.
As human beings, we're bound to be biased with our picks and potentially fall into the trap of swinging with the public. With advanced stats growing in popularity and getting harder to track, college football computer predictions are starting to become more relied on.
Betting on a moneyline simply means you're picking the outright winner of the game, regardless of the scoring margin or total. If the team you choose wins, then your bet hits. Here's what it will look like over at your favorite sportsbook:
| Team | Moneyline |
|---|---|
| Alabama Crimson Tide | -120 |
| Missouri Tigers | +150 |
In this case, Alabama is favored to win the game as its moneyline odds have a minus sign (-) in front of the number. The favorites will have the minus sign present, and the underdogs will have a plus sign (+). Easy, right?
Betting the spread gives your bet a bit more breathing room. Here, you don't need to sweat out a team to win. Instead, you can wager on the point differential on the scoreboard.
Betting on the spread is a good idea when the moneyline profits aren't enticing. There's no point betting on Alabama as a heavy -1500 favorite over Missouri. But taking Missouri to keep the scoring margin within a certain frame will get you more bang for your buck.
| Team | Spread |
|---|---|
| Alabama Crimson Tide | -24.5 (-105) |
| Missouri Tigers | +24.5 (-115) |
In this example, the Tide are favored to dominate their game against Missouri, outperforming them by at least 24.5 points.
If Alabama does win by more than 25 points, that would mean the Crimson Tide covered the spread. But if the Tide won by just 20 points, then that would mean the Tigers "covered the spread" instead.
If you think the outcome of a game could flip in either direction, then an Over/Under is the way to go. This bet relies on the combined score from both teams and whether it goes Over or Under the point total listed at sportsbooks. Then, who cares who wins?
| Team | Total |
|---|---|
| Alabama Crimson Tide | O 52.5 (-110) |
| Missouri Tigers | U 52.5 (-110) |
In this example, oddsmakers have set the total score for the game at 52.5 points. The choice is now up to you. If you think the Tide and Tigers will score a combined total of more than 52.5 points, 53 points or more, then pick the Over. If you're thinking otherwise, then bet the Under, and the bet will hit if they score fewer than 52.5 points.
If the set number was a whole number like 52 points and the two teams score exactly that amount, then it is considered a push and you'd get your money back.
Use these additional college football betting resources to compare markets, find more picks, and research specific betting angles before placing a wager.
If you're ready to bet on college football picks, you first need to find the right sportsbook. Our betting sites guide offers secure banking, the best odds, bonuses, and reliable customer service options for you.
More than a dozen Covers college football picks are released throughout the week during the season, covering all the biggest games and matchups.
Covers provides free NCAA football picks covering many markets, including point spreads, totals, moneylines, player props, and more.