Would it surprise you to know that a former NFL quarterback supports a current NFL quarterback?

No, probably not, and while there may be some inherent bias with Dan Orlovsky, his takes on Carson Wentz have been interesting and intuitive in recent weeks. He’s a Wentz supporter and has gone on Twitter and other platforms to break down film and talk about the disadvantages the Birds’ QB is currently dealing with, which mostly boils down to a crappy injury situation resulting in a lack of dynamic players around him.

Max Kellerman is more of an anti-Wentz guy this season, and on First Take today, he talked over a reel of Wentz incompletions from last night, explaining that he was not impressed with an overtime home win against a 2-10 Giants team. Orlovsky responded to that, and I’ll start with his explanation:

We don’t have to sit here and argue about every single throw, but Orlovsky adds a lot of perspective, for sure. He’s a little too pro-Wentz at times, almost as if the guy can do no wrong, when everybody knows that Carson has missed throws this year and underwhelmed on plenty of occasions, injury situation notwithstanding.


Kellerman’s points were valid, too, most of which go something like this:

  • Should it really take three full quarters for Wentz to start playing well against a bad Giants team?
  • How much is the injury situation an excuse?
  • What happened to the Wentz we saw in 2017?
  • Is he a true leader and can he really elevate the players around him?

Here’s part of his argument:

Good segment, for real.

Either way, it feels like the national attitude is more pro-Wentz than anti-Wentz. Locally, it feels like a 50/50 split to me, though I think the Nick Foles narrative has died down a bit after his recent struggles in Jacksonville. But I think we can all agree that Wentz badly needed that kind of fourth-quarter performance.