Do you mean like these strikes tried to stop the forward progress of the person closing the gap here?
I think there is a very sound tactical reasoning behind not staying on the line of attack. In my experience, it's directly related to timing being difficult, mass and inertia often being on the other attacker's side, accuracy never being guaranteed, etc.
When I lived through the Gracie world exposure, I saw it being based not only on the specialty of their technique/the general world ignorance of ground-fighting, but also saw it based upon an ignorance of strikers regarding their own tactics. That is to say, what made BJJ so successful early on was not only a general ignorance regarding ground-fighting on the part of non-practitioners but also a striker's ignorance regarding how to strike without opening oneself up to having the gap closed on them (taking them out of their striking game). Once strikers (re)figured this part of their own tactics out, the story changed a bit:
For me, the standing in front and striking, expecting the strikes to stop the forward progress of the attacker, is not only not akin to general Aikido tactics but not at all enlightened to the truth the Gracie's were kind enough to share with the world at large. For me, I would not adopt it either as a practitioner or as a teacher. This may be Boon's point - if I'm reading him correctly.
Thank you for posting those clips. Those videos, should be a huge warning to every Aikidoka regarding static movements or concentrating on flowing Aikido dance demonstrations. Funny how the pretty, very fancy Karate, Kung Fu guys were complete helpless once outside of their comfort zone of static movements. Really a shame most Aikidoka are delusional about the realities of self defense. I enjoyed.