Well, I agree with you to certain extent. As I have said, Liverpool too dominated last years tournament and yet found themselves at the loosing end. As a matter of fact, I can't remember convincing South American team since Riquelme led Boac against Real (Porto game was just a mid-night horror). So no disagreement in principle.
But what I disagree with many here is, they simply think "the world championship" title belong to Barca because they won CL. Its nobody's right and you have earn this title. Last time I checked, CL is strictly for Europeans so World Club Championship is only way to determine who is "better".
Beside, CL itself is often filled with bizzare results and under the new format hardly the best team "ever" get to win it these days anyway (Barca deserved their win last year though, they were simply the best team). Milan was superior every single department on the pitch to Liverpool who only arrived at final because (1) a correct goal wrongly disallowed (2) a dubious given to them by a ref. Arsenal barely finished 4th in their league last year because their main rival got buggered (literally) on the last day of the season. Porto as a CL holder? That was rather strong result.
The history shows European won during times when people have reason to suspect them to be better, and lost when South American were "regarded" to be better. In general, the pattern of trophy holders have been remarkably similar to the general reputation the teams hold, but only in recent years there have been a pattern of divergences with some bizarre results along the way. You can attribute other factors beside like Cryuff did, or rather you can claim European recent "reputation" is unjustified like I am doing here. Europeans are better but no that better, because large part of the glamor of CL is as much hype filled with money as it is with substance.