Forgive me, I didn't know your knowledge was greater than The V. Rev. Fr. John Meyendorff of Blessed Memory, Dean Emeritus and Church History and Patristics Professor of St. Vladimir's Seminary, lecturer of Byzantine theology at Harvard and Fordham Universities, Adjunct Professor at Columbia University and Union Theological Seminary. To beat it all, you can apparently refute him with no actual arguments or sources, but instead a few dismissive sentences that swiftly explain my vast ignorance.
And, I do apologize if all of that sounds rather brusque, but it's quite frustrating to me when I try to have a discussion with someone and bring what I know to the table and receive nothing but a verbal wave of the hand, as if I should go play and not bother the grown-ups. I'm more than willing to admit I don't know what I'm talking about and learn something, as I'm pretty new to this whole Orthodoxy thing...so if you do have something to share, please do so, and don't brush me off out of hand as if I'm unable to even hold intelligent discourse on the matter. I would very much appreciate that.
Sorry about the verbal wave of the hand. As is the nature of these discussion and it becomes necessary to refute something often times the source material is not handy and takes some time to dig and research.
First off, Fr. John is not a Liturgical Theologian, and historical liturgy is not his field of expertise. His son Paul (who is a Liturgical Theologian) is critical of his father on these points. Not much has ever really been studied academically about the historical practice of the Orthodox marriage ceremony so there is a lack of resources available to the general public. Another person who tries to advance the theories of Fr. John Meyendorff on marriage and the Eucharist is Bishop John Zizoulias.
Now if you wish to hear other sources I suggest you try and find writings on marriage from either Gregory Roeber or Philip Mamalakis. Their academic stuff is not available on the internet as far as a quick search would allow. Also if you want to stay in the Meyendorff tradition stick with Paul Meyendorff.
You may also be interested in reading The History of Human Marriage, Volume 2
By Edward Westermarck. Take a look at pages 449-456 as it talks about all the different uses of food and drink as part of marriage ceremonies.
Ok, now here are my own thoughts based on what I have observed and studied for over 20 years now.
The Eucharist is still the central part of the Marriage ceremony if the couple participates fully in how a wedding should be approached. We have gotten into the bad habit of performing weddings on other days then Sundays and this removes an element of fasting and preparation for the day. I hear priest remind the bridal party that they should not party before the wedding and show up sober for the wedding. This reminder is needed because many of those who are approaching marriage do not do it with a love of Christ first and foremost in their hearts.
So, if one is to approach marriage in the traditional way then the services begins and ends with Eucharist celebration. To have a marriage on a Sunday it means that the day begins with the Liturgy and the couple should participate in that liturgy for it is the last time as a single person. The couple is married, several days of honeymoon and, then they should return to the church to commune together as man and wife and, have their crowns removed. That is how the Eucharist should work in the context of the marriage ceremony.
We have gotten away from this concept of a week long celebration were the couple wears their crowns all week. Marriage is not just an hour long service and it is done and you go on with the rest of your life. No, there is a build up of celebration and that celebration continues even unto the bedroom. The first time the couple lays together is a liturgical moment of beauty and necessary to make the marriage legal.
The sad reality is we marry outside the faith and therefore the Eucharist is not central and the marriage is ultimately not a holy event.