After all, the point of a blurb is that they want to attract your attention and make you ultimately buy the book with just a handful of words. So it's not really the place to look for intelligent comparisons.

On the other hand, precisely that might be a reason to, as you say, name Jordan or Martin rather than Tolkien. But then, that does happen often enough... I've read very little fantasy of the last five or so years, but I do recall seeing several fantasy books that had praise from Jordan and Erikson in their blurbs at least.

Of course, Tolkien is still extremely relevant, even without the movies, but I agree that it's silly to compare every fantasy author to him - especially the ones who don't reach to his ankles. Martin certainly does, but as others have noted above, his similarity to Tolkien is mostly limited to the genre.

Of course Tolkien will always be the godfather of the genre - without him there's no Jordan or Martin. There are others who have made great contributions to the originality of the genre, too, though I haven't really read many of those and so won't try naming names. But fair enough, one credits the writers who were a direct influence on one's writing, there's no point in trying to go back up all the chain to the "original" influence, or else people would be crediting nobody but Homer.

I'm afraid it will still take a few generations before Tolkien ceased to be mentioned so often, though - and even then, it would require new authors standing up to replace him. With all due respect to the authors of the main epic fantasies of today, many of whose books I loved, I can't see any of them being big names still sixty years hence.