Is Dan Orlovsky falling into the hot take abyss?

Dan Orlovsky has risen through the ranks at ESPN because he’s not willing to put himself out on a limb and share his honest opinion. And as he is very proud to state, it comes from his unmatched dedication to his craft and watching film. But when it comes to his favoritism of Ty Simpson over Fernando Mendoza for the NFL Draft, it’s fair to wonder why he is on an island all by himself.

The ESPN analyst has been adamant that he favors the Alabama quarterback over the Indiana national championship and Heisman winner as an NFL prospect.

Truth be told, it is far from the first time that Dan Orlovsky has staked out an outlier position. Before the 2024 NFL Draft, the ESPN analyst said he would have taken LSU star Jayden Daniels with the top pick over Caleb Williams. Through two seasons, it’s fair to at least call that a push, even if not many folks agreed with Orlovsky at the time.

Sometimes, we are all guilty of shaming someone who is willing to take a risk and not fall victim to groupthink. Merril Hoge was famously bearish on Johnny Manziel’s pro prospects against the rest of the world… and it turns out he was actually right.

But Dan Orlovsky is increasingly staking out positions that seem like they’re more than just bold takes or strong opinions that are based on facts and research. See the furor he created during the NFL playoffs, both with his takes about Josh Allen and his very obvious bias towards Matthew Stafford and weird vibes with Drake Maye for the NFL MVP race. Instead, Orlovsky increasingly seems like he is living in an alternate version of reality.

Nowhere was that clearer than in a totally surreal interview with Pat McAfee. Orlovsky and McAfee appear to have a great relationship where they can bust up each other about everything from football to fart sounds. But although things started with laughs and giggles, it got a little tense during his Tuesday appearance when talking about his opinions on the consensus top-two quarterbacks in this year’s draft class.

First, the fact that the ESPN analyst had to state that his analysis isn’t a grand conspiracy led by CAA should be eye-popping enough. If your take is so bold that the first thought from fans is that you’re merely trying to tout your agency, that is a concerning signal. But when you actually break down what he said, it defies logic, belief, and what we all watched during the last college football season.

While stumping for Mendoza, McAfee rightly pointed out that he performed well in the biggest games. Orlovsky then snapped back, “What biggest games?”

Here’s what Mendoza did in the literal biggest games in the history of Indiana Hoosiers football.

Big Ten Championship vs Ohio State: 15-23, 222 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, 89.6 QBR
CFP Quarterfinal vs Alabama: 14-16, 192 yards, 3 TDs, 0 INTs, 96.7 QBR
CFP Semifinal vs Oregon: 17-20, 177 yards, 5 TDs, 0 INTs, 98.5 QBR
CFP National Championship vs Miami: 16-27, 186 yards, 1 Rush TD, 0 INTs, 90.6 QBR

“You’re right, those SEC games are bigger than the f—ing playoff games, Dan,” McAfee mockingly said.

Orlovsky then tried to hold Mendoza’s Big Ten championship game performance against him, noting that the Hoosiers were down 13-6 heading into the fourth quarter. That’s not accurate. Indiana took a 13-10 lead with 8 minutes to play in the third quarter and that was the final score of the game. Mendoza also made what amounted to the game-clinching play with a 33-yard pass on third down to Charlie Becker.

“I’m giving you factual information, not opinion,” Orlovsky said.

The problem is it wasn’t factual information. And again, as McAfee said, the Ohio State defense is one of the best in the history of college football and will likely have multiple defenders drafted in the Top 10 this year.

But the biggest factor that works against Orlovsky is that we saw Fernando Mendoza and Ty Simpson go head-to-head in the Rose Bowl. 23.9 million people watched that game, and they all saw only one quarterback play like a top overall prospect as Mendoza and the Hoosiers wiped the floor with the Crimson Tide.

Simpson threw for just 67 yards against the Hoosiers. Dante Moore threw for 285, Julian Sayin had 258, and Carson Beck had 232 yards in their respective games against Indiana. Simpson had by far the worst output against Indiana of the quarterbacks faced in those final four games.

And as the ESPN analyst confidently stated, that’s factual information, not opinion.

The biggest issue here is that it’s one thing for Dan Orlovsky to hype up Ty Simpson if he thinks he’s the better quarterback from purely watching film. Talk about his NFL arm, his ability to make plays “in moment of panic,” or anything else. That’s fair game. But to ask “what biggest games” Fernando Mendoza played in while he put up four consecutive historic performances against elite teams on the way to a title completely blows any nuanced argument that he’s trying to make out of the water. It’s something you would expect to hear from Stephen A. Smith, not from the person who prides himself on being the meticulous film-watcher who always calls it as he sees it.

It also makes the ESPN analyst appear to have an agenda to sell, as was the case during the Stafford-Maye MVP debate. Mel Kiper Jr. blowing up his narrative (along with Mike Tannenbaum) that NFL teams shared his opinions on Simpson and Mendoza doesn’t help his cause either.

Orlovsky’s words carry a lot of weight. He’s been one of the most respected voices covering the NFL for years because of just how seriously he takes his job. But if these questions surrounding Dan Orlovsky and his analysis are going to become a pattern, then one of ESPN’s most trusted football analysts could become one of its least.