they weren't weak, they just didn't have enough people.

What you're essentially saying is 'they weren't weak, they were just weak'.

Population (and thus army size) is a measure of strength. The smaller your population - the smaller your army. The smaller your army, the weaker you are.

It seems like a weird attempt to place the Ottomans on an ultimate pedestal of greatness. The Ottomans were incredibly strong once - and then they were not. This is how empires across history have always worked - including Muslim empires.

I feel like this is the equivalent of saying, 'I am actually as strong as Arnold Schwarzenegger - I just don't have the time to train. I'm not weaker than him - I'm just as strong!'

The Ottoman empire was already punching way above its weight

This shows a distinct weakness in the Ottoman Empire on several levels. On the administrative level, on the leadership level, and, for us Muslims, on the piety level. So great was the ambition of the Ottoman Empire, that it fell into the same foolish desire as all the empires that preceded it? Were those in power not content with what Allah had given them? They had to have more?

I share these thoughts because nationalism (a sort of modern tribalism) of any kind is generally discouraged in Islam, and we should not brush the failures of the Ottoman Empire under the carpet. We should learn from both the successes and the failures, so that if Allah grants a Muslim nation (indeed, if Allah grants us a Muslim nation, first, of course...) with that level of hegemony (unlikely, as the era of tangible, apparent empires is over) again, we will not succumb to the same failures of previous empires.