That's also why Atletico isn't that good. Having more possession and be the attacking side is not just a matter of tactical choices, it is also a matter of quality. If you have to teams playing a match with the same tactics but different in quality, the better will have most of the possession and attack more.
Of course tactics and quality are connected, but in a sense that if the team isn't that good, you'll have a better chance of getting a result with defensive tactics. But that is also more about chance and less about control, if you don't have the ball you don't have the initiative and are to a certain extend dependent on the opponent not doing very much with the possession. And if they score first, you have the problem of having to attack, to do something you're tactics and players aren't made for. A really good team wants the initiative, make sure they win rather than taking a chance, to be really good you'll have to be able to take the possession and initiative, and create chances independent of the other side leaving space for counter attacks.
Of course you can win the CL with counter attacking football, but it's a bit less about supremacy and a bit more about riding your luck. Counter attacking football is the privilege of the underdog, the gamblers, not for the 'must win'-clubs. Fort Atletico the underdog position is fine, but to be up there with Barca, Real, Bayern and PSG year after year, they would have to make a big step and get a lot better with possession and attacking football.