I remember doing the rudder hard-over module in easyJet over a decade ago, which was quite a fun session, finding that the aircraft could be fully recovered in 1500' from a 135 deg bank angle and 10 deg nose down in landing configuration; it was very educational. RYR do a lot of upset training, too, though it concentrates mostly on high altitude stalls and not so many severe UAs. Both airlines have done quite a lot of doble-engine failure training, too, well before the bad year of the LHR, Hudson and CIA accidents. It's interesting that two locos that draw heavy criticism for having so many cadets and low hours captains seem to be so well ahead on this element of training.
My perception is that there has been a creeping reduction in the abilities and reactions of new cadet pilots to handle the aircraft and they have become much more computer dependent. Many of these cadets become more proficient with experience, depending on the nature of the individual captains they fly with. I think the SOP and automatics mantras have been pushed to hard, that line experience has already been lost, and that fear cultures (compounded by live FDM) prevent pilots from learning or practicing, even in ideal conditions. I find FOs very reluctant to try self positioning or raw data approaches, even in calm and cavok conditions, and those who are keen say that most captains won't allow it. I think that culture needs to be addressed - practice of basic skills when the circumstances permit should be actively encouraged by industry management.
Personally, I think that an aeros, spinning and severe UA recovery section should be reinstated in the ATPL training. The laws of physics and aerodynamics don't change a great deal between light singles and heavy jets - the differences are mainly just details, but the principles are consistent.