I think it’s fair to say City should have won more than two of the last five titles given the strength of their squad over that time and the relative underperformances of other clubs - United, Chelses, Arsenal, Liverpool. City should have won at least three of those five championships, but underperformed.
City’s squad simply isn’t the best in the country any more, though. Nobody could make a case for Bravo being better than De Gea or Lloris, or Sagna at his age being better than Walker or Bellerin, or Clichy being better than Monreal or Rose, or Otamendi being better than Alderweireld or Koscielny. That’s just the defence, but City trail Spurs and Arsenal in terms of quality in four of those five positions alone. This trend goes on through the midfields.
Guess what i’m trying to say is that whilst it’s fair to say the biggest spenders should hope to win the title (United, City, Chelsea), and the clubs with the best coaches should have a better chance (City, Liverpool, Spurs, United), it’s a pretty logical argument to say the clubs with the strongest squads should have the best chance…and in order that’s now Arsenal, Spurs and City.