4:19 AM
it could definitely be true. part of why stable homotopy theory has kept chugging along through the years is all the successful conceptual / organizational work that's accompanied its grittier parts. meanwhile, there's a great deal of "raw" unstable work out there, but afaict much less (successful) organizing principles, hence it's harder to learn about and (i hope no one finds this assessment too untoward) often feels like it's groaning under its own weight
imo it'd be great if the "community average interest" pulled more in that direction—EHP sequences, the billion things mahowald did, the various goofy forms of "surgery" on homotopy types, etc etc. one can't expect conceptual work to happen overnight, especially if we aren't regularly revisiting this stuff, and so just being more exposed to / redigesting the body of literature would already be great step
or: i hope you write notes :P one doesn't have to improve on toda to make an impact here
i also hope someone comes through who has a better immediate answer for you, but i'd still wager that that answer indeed points to material from the 70s, 80s
what i'm cognizant of is surely very biased, but i'm the most modern unstable excitement i know of is around the goodwillie tower. behrens has an AMS memoir which covers its interaction with the EHP system, so you could check his bibliography—but, at a glance, his references are from the era you name, and it's hard to tell if that's bc he's responsible about citing original work or bc those are (also) the unique references available