The problem with 'organized' risk assessment/management is that risk is dynamic, not static, and these assessments have the potential to lull some people into a false sense of security: "I did my risk assessment and we're good to go with the mission now".

I too have seen a degradation in stick & rudder skills as both civilian & military flight schools focus a lot of time and effort on aeronautical decision making, risk assessment, etc. Stuff that takes time away from real things.

Likewise, the move towards synthetic training devices has limited the opportunity to hone stick and rudder skills. Even full-motion, level D simulators will only ever be 1g and 2D vis (well, 3D vis may come one day, but it still won't be like real vision anytime in the foreseeable future). The 1g means you can't replicate sinks, slips, or skids and the 2D vis, no matter how photo-realistic, will never give you true depth perception or peripheral vision (although some of the fighter non-motion, 360-deg vis things do some of it). This means you're teaching guys to fly procedures and numbers - which gets you most of the way there, but will never make you a pilot.