What are you saying?
Do you think "most" FMA instructors have been in a knife fight?
Do you think the attacks in FMA are not "stylistic"?
Do you think the concept of centerline doesn't play a HUGE role in aikido?
I think it is well past time that we start separating training methodologies from the content of an art.
For our own organization of thought, it is high time we are clear about what we want to know.
Technical syllabus is one thing, I don't believe FMA have anything "over" Aikido in this area.
Training methodologies are another thing. This would involve sparring, resistance drills etc. Some FMA have a major advantage here over most Aikido. The dog brothers are a good example of this.
Experience is another thing. People who have been in real life and death knife fights. This kind of experience is fleeting. First there are few people who have been in a life and death struggle over a knife. Second, most people who have didn't gather that much information from the exchange. That is to say, the one or two encounters didn't give them huge amounts of (non-personal) information over people who haven't been in a knife fight.
When training with an experienced person, it's important to remember they can only give you some insights, they cannot give you their experience. This can be seen time and again in sport martial arts. The best competitors don't necessarily make good teachers, and will often have a stable of students who are not great competitors.
Knife fighting is extremely dangerous, so very few would choose, or have the opportunity to be in many life and death exchanges. With the few that have, there is no guarantee that they can pass along any information that will help you.
Sparring, is as close as most of us will ever get (it's also as close as we want to get). Sparring can tell us what technical syllabus work well in sparring. But it's important to remember that sparring is not knife fighting.