So it was not named after Orleans itself? I'm surprised. I thought it was named along a similar method as New York or New France were.
It's not that different, New York was not actually named after York but rather the Duke of York, later King James II. New France, New England, New Spain etc were easy ways to refer to collections of colonies.
It seems it would make more sense to name them after the cities, how peculiar.
Some might have been but naming cities after significant royal figures is an old tradition going all the way back to Zaragoza (originally Caesar-Augusta) or Constantinople (city of Constantine) or Alexandria for Alexander the Great.