Ty Simpson could quickly climb NFL draft boards

Show summary Hide summary

• Orlovsky’s bold call and the fallout
• What Ty Simpson showed at Alabama — strengths and limits
  • Key attributes scouts like
  • Reasons for caution
• Why Fernando Mendoza’s season is hard to ignore
  • Context behind Mendoza’s surge
• Agent ties and narrative shaping: how much do they matter?
• How NFL teams will weigh Simpson vs. Mendoza
• What this means for the Raiders and other teams in need of a QB
• Prospect grade snapshot: where the board might land

Dan Orlovsky’s recent on-air take on ESPN set off a fresh debate among NFL draft followers: could Alabama’s Ty Simpson be the sleeper who ultimately tops the quarterback board in 2026, even ahead of Fernando Mendoza? The comment landed like a curveball in a draft cycle many already think is Mendoza’s to lose.

Mendoza’s Heisman season at Indiana, capped by a national title, has him widely projected as the likely No. 1 overall pick. Still, Orlovsky’s endorsement of Simpson — aired on “Get Up” — forced analysts and fans to revisit both quarterbacks’ resumes and the wider context NFL teams consider when choosing a franchise signal-caller.

Orlovsky’s bold call and the fallout

On live television, Orlovsky argued that Simpson deserves consideration as the top quarterback in the 2026 class. The claim immediately rippled through mock-draft chatter and social feeds, prompting two main reactions: supporters who point to Simpson’s elite moments at Alabama, and skeptics who view Mendoza’s season-long production as indisputable.

Internet sleuths quickly noted that both players share the same agency — CAA — and floated the idea that representation might be shaping the narrative. That theory has traction in some circles, but it’s just one of several explanations for why pundits sometimes push less conventional prospects into the spotlight.

What Ty Simpson showed at Alabama — strengths and limits

Simpson’s lone full stretch as Alabama’s starter showcased flashes that would excite any NFL evaluator. In that season he threw for 3,567 yards, completed 28 touchdown passes and was picked off just five times, while also contributing five rushing TDs. When healthy, he looked like a quarterback capable of running a high-powered offense.

Key attributes scouts like

• Poise in the pocket and the ability to make throws on time.
• Good ball placement and a low interception rate relative to attempts.
• Athleticism that adds a rushing element.

Reasons for caution

• Limited starting experience: Simpson’s sample size as a full-time starter is small — roughly 15 games — and his season was interrupted by injuries.
• Depth chart history: he waited behind Jalen Milroe and Bryce Young before earning the job, which delayed his live-game development.
• Surrounding talent at Alabama was inconsistent: one key receiver struggled, and other top weapons project as mid-round picks.

Why Fernando Mendoza’s season is hard to ignore

Mendoza’s path to Heisman and championship glory leaned on both performance and upgraded surroundings. Before transferring to Indiana, he logged significant reps at Cal — including a sophomore season with 3,004 yards, 16 TDs and six interceptions — which already gave NFL scouts useful tape.

His jump at Indiana was dramatic: a 3,535-yard campaign with 41 touchdown passes to only six interceptions. That volume of production, paired with team success, naturally boosts a prospect’s draft stock.

Context behind Mendoza’s surge

• Indiana invested in offensive pieces via NIL and transfers to give Mendoza better targets and protection.
• Top playmakers like Omar Cooper Jr. and Elijah Sarratt helped elevate Mendoza’s efficiency and big-play numbers.
• Consistent game reps over multiple seasons reduced the projection risk associated with younger signal-callers.

Agent ties and narrative shaping: how much do they matter?

The fact both quarterbacks are within CAA’s roster has fed conspiracy-minded takes suggesting media nudges or PR strategies. While agencies do work to increase exposure for their clients, directly tying a single pundit’s opinion to agency promotion risks oversimplifying how draft narratives form.

Broadcast commentators have individual opinions shaped by tape, conversations with scouts, and pattern recognition. Agencies can amplify a story, but talent evaluation still relies on game film, measurables, and team interviews.

How NFL teams will weigh Simpson vs. Mendoza

Front offices balance projection and production when assessing quarterbacks. Here are the main factors any team drafting high next spring will likely consider:

1. Durability and medical history — did injuries limit Simpson’s tape?
2. Consistency over time — Mendoza produced at a high level across a full season and benefited from sustained sample size.
3. Supporting cast and scheme fit — Mendoza’s season was aided by a deliberate roster build; Simpson had flashes despite inconsistent weapons.
4. Intangibles — leadership, decision-making under pressure, and adaptability to NFL concepts.

Supply and demand matters, too: quality franchise quarterbacks are rare, and teams often take calculated risks on potential over proven steadiness if they believe ceiling-based upside outweighs uncertainty.

What this means for the Raiders and other teams in need of a QB

Las Vegas, which won just two games with Geno Smith last season, is widely expected to chase a quarterback early in the draft. If they land the No. 1 pick and Mendoza is the consensus favorite, that would be the clearest path to pairing a top prospect with a desperate roster.

But teams without the top pick face choice dilemmas: draft the safer, highly productive option or gamble on upside-packed players like Simpson who might blossom with stronger surrounding talent and coaching.

Prospect grade snapshot: where the board might land

• Fernando Mendoza: High floor and high ceiling thanks to recent production, team success, and clean interception rate against heavy volume.
• Ty Simpson: Higher variance pick — potentially elite traits but fewer starts and some durability questions make him a risk-reward option.
• Other draft candidates and trades could reshape the front of the board; quarterback valuation is heavily context-dependent.

You might also like:

• NFL combine: three quarterbacks with the most to prove
• Top 25 College Football Insights: LSU, Alabama, Utah Lead the Pack
• College football AP top 25 week 5 gets it wrong again
• Raiders drafting Fernando Mendoza no. 1 overall could be a costly mistake
• 2026 NFL draft: four teams leading the way so far