It is really poor. There is no sign that they do their research or have anything insightful to add. It's one predictable cliche after another from most of the pundits. They need more of the likes of Jamie Moore. McCrory is the worst.
Some (idiots) criticised Larry Merchant, but the guy took his job seriously. He would watch the fighters' last few fights, he'd research their careers, and he'd put their performances in context for a viewer. He'd ask the crucial questions about each fighter and create a storyline. The man added so much to the fights he covered. Compare to Sky who, as you rightly say, reheat some old clichés and offer some lazy background straight from their laptop, clearly gathered by some poor work experience researcher (like Dan Vano - j/k Dan). In some cases, I'd swear they've never even seen half of the fighters they commentate on.