First, The Messiah was already regarded as " cut off" at the close of a previous division of the weeks, viz. after the first 7 + 62 = 69 weeks, or 483 years.
Secondly, The disastrous end of the city and the sanctuary is supposed to have come before the seventieth week begins. (Compare the conclusion of verse 26.) After the Messiah was cut off and before the last week, it will be noticed by the careful reader that there is an interval of indefinite length, filled up by the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and a course of war and desolation which is not yet terminated.
Thirdly, After all this comes the last, or seventieth week, which has to do with "the beast" as clearly as the first 69 weeks bring us down to Christ's death, the interruption of the chain being left room for, and supplied, in the latter part of verse 26.
Fourthly, It is clear that when the Messiah has been cut off, another personage is spoken of " as the prince that shall come," whom it is absurd to confound with the Messiah, because it is his people who ravage the Jewish city and sanctuary; that is, it is a Roman prince, and not the promised Head of Israel.
Fifthly, As this future prince of the Romans is the last person spoken of, it is most natural, unless adequate reasons appear to the contrary, to consider that verse 27 refers to him, and not to the slain Messiah: " and he shall confirm covenant" (not "the" covenant, as the margin shows).
Sixthly, This is remarkably strengthened by the time for which the covenant is made, namely, for seven years, which has, in my opinion, no sense if applied to anything founded on the Lord's death, but exactly coincides with the two periods of the earlier, and the later half-weeks, during which the Roman beast acts variously in the Apocalypse.
Seventhly, It is yet more fortified by the additional fact, that when half the time of this covenant expires, " He shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease," just as might be gathered from Rev. 11 and other Scriptures.