It's not possible defend Bulger's play right now, so I won't even try. I just am tired of hearing people say we made a mistake with the decision because at the time Bulger was a better player and Warner was not only perpetually injured but he was suffering from Battered QB Syndrome (as Bulger is now).
Your point is valid because Warner had trouble in NY as well. However, I don't think Bulger was EVER better than Warner, and a lot of that has to do with mechanics and other various little things that I've always noticed. This season, commentators have started pointing out that Bulger is throwing off of his back foot, but he's always done that. He's never really learned to check down receivers, even though he throws to the pacifier a lot (TE's). While the O-Line is to blame for a lot of things, Bulger carries some of that responsibility as well. I like pocket quarterbacks, and I'm not saying that he should scramble, but he's so slow in the pocket and he always takes a sack rather than getting throwing the ball out of bounds (when he has the time to do so). It's true that you don't need a cannon arm to be a good NFL QB...look at Joe Montana. Bulger was the wrong quarterback for the Rams when he took over, because they were built around speed and deep timing routes. It's hard to watch guys like Holt repeatedly torch d-backs only to either have the QB not even look at him or underthrow the ball by 5 yards. Of course, Holt has lost a step, but he was at the top of the league when Bulger took over. One of Warner's strong suits is that he is the best timing-route QB that I've ever seen, and he could complete those passes 10 yards or 50 yards downfield.
But really, how do you feel about Fletcher's comments? I think he was right in being frustrated.