The conversation was around a wild list by one poster that covered all this. So I'm well within the bounds of the converstion.
One response was that Duke has a better history than UConn. It's indisputable, but you commented that "titles are all that matters." I responded to you on that.
As for Big East vs. ACC—a different topic that I responded to separately with a different quote-tweet: right now the Big East is better. Historically the ACC is better than the Big East. In the 1980s, the ACC and Big East each had two titles (and that's all that matters, right?), and in the 2000s the ACC had Duke, Maryland, UNC, UNC, Duke, Duke, UNC, Virginia. The Big East had UConn, Syracuse, UConn, Louisville, Villanova, Villanova, UConn. Two of those programs in the Big East column are elsewhere. The ACC was bad last year because Louisville, Syracuse, Virginia, and UNC were not good. Nor were Florida State or Notre Dame. Those programs have, in the last 20 years, usually been very good. I'd bet they will be again.
Big East is better right now and more cohesive. But the ACC has traditionally been a better league and will be back in the conversation soon.