I have in fact seen some secular historians say Daniel was written after the Gospels b/c it predicts the destruction of the 2nd Temple. It doesn't make sense to them: If Daniel is written to the Exiles, & he's prophecying they'll return to the Promised Land to rebuild the Temple, why is he telling them that the Temple will be destroyed again? Daniel also gives them precise times, & those precise times were when the Exiles returned & when the 2nd Temple was destroyed. So they figure Daniel must be written after the 2nd Temple was destroyed. But indeed, it doesn't make sense b/c Daniel's prophecying the Messiah will come around that time too, & it's well-known Jews were expecting the Messiah then because of prophecy, specifically Daniel, & the abundance of manuscripts of Daniel clearly show it was circulating well before 70 AD.

I think most secular historians just attribute it to coincidence, but they definitely do think most of it was written after the other prophecies that did happen.

One other thing about Daniel, I see Evangelicals all the time say you need Daniel to understand Revelation, but I don't see that. I see Daniel prophecying from the Exile time to the destruction of the 2nd Temple. I do not see it prophecying about the End Times except a verse or 2.

Also, in regards to the date Jesus fulfilled that prophecy riding on the donkey, secularists say it's not that Daniel was written after it, it's that the Christians wrote the Gospels so it occured then so people would believe it was fulfilled (they backdated it). Me & you of course would disagree w/ them, but that'd be how they understand it. But the prophecies about the 2nd Temple's destruction are unparalleled.

A lot of people think the Gospels were written after the destruction of the Temple b/c Jesus reveals it, but they don't know Daniel predicted it hundreds of years earlier!