What you’re describing is the basic attitude of many Protestant churches and particularly the reformers and Puritans. However many of these would not think your ‘Word of Faith’ movement has a similar sincere attitude.
For example her is a quote from John Owen, a leading Calvinist in the 17th century.
Those who are called by the state of their flocks to engage sometimes in the exposition of abstruse and mysterious passages of Scripture, may do well to observe the ensuing rules, all which may be evidently gathered from the way and manner of our apostle’s treating concerning Melchisedec and his office:—(1.) That their interpretations be openly and evidently conformable to the analogy of faith. To search after new opinions in, or to found new or peculiar doctrines on, abstruse and mystical passages of Scripture, is a pestilent curiosity. (2.) That the exposition of them be necessary from present circumstances, which are principally two:—[1.] That the things contained in them do belong unto some important truth, which is plainly declared for the substance of it in other places, although from them it may receive light and illustration. (Owen, J. (1854). Vol. 21: An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Volume 4 (W. H. Goold, Ed.). Works of John Owen (552). Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter.)
The basic idea is that it is the duty of every minister to stick to the most open absolute and obvious doctrines of the Bible, and not to engage is minor curiosities for such careless feeding of the church is a great evil. The principal mysteries of the gospel concern the person, offices, and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. (person; 1 Tim. 3:16, work and office; Phil. 2:7–11 & grace, Eph. 3:8–11). For a minister not to focus on these plain and weighty doctrines is to waste the gifts and calling which they claim to have.
Now in the case that you mention the ‘Word of Faith’ movement I looked it up and am assuming it is as described by the wiki article. If this is true I am pretty sure many churches, would think your group is only claiming to be 'Sola Scriptural' but by espousing some of the prosperity gospel has in fact fallen into great error and opposed the clear central teaching of the scripture on that subject.
What I am saying is Yes, in theory many Protestants are 'Sola Scripture' to the max. However in practice, they would not think the 'Word of Faith' movement is. It still comes down to the exegesis of what that Sola Scripture is fundamentally saying. I for one like the introduction you make in theory and would say that best describes my own practice.
Note: I apologize if I have made an error in thinking 'Word of Faith' is basically that described in the wiki article. I would have to delete my answer if this is the case.