I watch City, Liverpool and Chelsea as often as I can, and I don't agree with your assessment. Rather, there are both benefits and disadvantages to the different approaches.
Liverpool is as dependent as we are on their top players delivering the goods. When they don't, or aren't available, they struggle - arguably more than we do. They dropped 22 points to bottom half teams last year, we dropped 12. Klopp may have a more clearly recognisable system than we have, but it is also more dependent on specific qualities in specific positions. This brings vulnerabilities as well as advantages, which the past two seasons wonderfully demonstrate.
Chelsea under Tuchel have a marvellous ability to control games, which is really the backbone of that team, and one that has already brought them a CL title. It was evident already in his first game, and is a very, very impressive achievement by Tuchel. But that too comes at a cost to offensive dynamism, and it is not self-evidently an approach that is superior in terms of delivering consistent results in the PL. Chelsea dropped 9 points to lower half teams in 19 games under Tuchel last season - hence struggling considerably more than we did against teams that generally did not attempt to dominate games, which is the sort of team against which a control approach has the fewest relative benefits.
City of course is a machine, and the kind of football Pep can deliver when he's got the necessary parts available is a sight to behold. But City these days also have their vulnerabilities. They are no longer the sort of team who racks up 25 shots and blow opponents away. The shots are fewer, the score margins more often narrower. It's not that rare these days to see them produce only a small handful of big scoring chances through a game, though that is usually enough. But it's two seasons now where they haven't really approached the levels they achieved in the preceding two seasons. And for once, they now look like they have a couple of significant holes in the squad (left back, striker).
I think it's fair to claim that of the top 4 teams, ours is the style that provides the most leeway for some exceptionally talented attacking players to make full use of their talents, and this may be more of a strength than a weakness. It's not a choice between structure and anarchy, every team and every system has to strike a balance between freedom of expression and structure. More structure isn't necessarily the same thing as a better system. Bruno seems to me to be a good example - given licence to roam at United, he's an exceptional player. Being shovelled into a much more defined and limited role in the portuguese national team, he doesn't accomplish very much.