Time moves more slowly near a mass than in relatively empty space. For example, I get that an observer would see someone falling into a black hole to appear to move more slowly and get "stuck" on the event horizon, while the falling body would see the observer as aging more rapidly.
Additionally, an observer watching a passenger craft moving near the speed of light (high mass equivalent) might see a passenger who tripped falling in slow motion, because the forward momentum of the passenger + the speed of the craft must never exceed the speed of light, while the passenger would experience no effect of this time dilation, and would simply trip and fall.
Which brings me to my question...
Black holes, even supermassive black holes, are nowhere near the mass of the universe as a whole; so when the universe itself was much smaller and far more dense, then at a universal scale time itself would have progressed more "slowly" than it does today, and since the expansion of the universe is accelerating, doesn't it mean that time is also accelerating?
(Assuming, of course, there was some "outside" to observe this from).
This is not a duplicate of Does time slow down because the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate?. That question and its answers seem more concerned with local, relativistic time (which is as malleable as space itself). My question asks more about the effect across a universal scale as it relates to density of mass across that same universal scale.