I think in a lot of ways, this and all that follows, miss my point.
VT was certainly overrated, but Duke was flat-out atrocious. They were, simply, a bad team. The point is in the difference in the way our guys played the two games. It's like something happened during the week between VT and Duke, so instead of building on the momentum and dismantling Duke, which is what happens in any normal timeline, we go out and play patty cake with them and get obliterated. It's impossible to overstate just how embarrassing that game was on both sides of the ball. Any argument over whether the offense or defense was worse is academic. We certainly didn't look like world beaters against VT, but we looked like we belonged on the field with them. We didn't look like we belonged on the field with Duke. I can't imagine what could cause that sort of 180° in play.