I really disagree. I like Fitzgerald (who doesn't?) but he has always been a little overrated while Gore has always been a little underrated. They both have 9 1,000 yard seasons, and in this era, 1,000 yards as a rusher is more impressive than 1,000 yards as a receiver. Fitzgerald has more pro bowl nods, but that doesn't mean that much to me, especially because there are more pro bowl spots for WRs, and in this era of 10,000 pro bowl alternates, what does a pro bowl selection even really mean?
Fitzgerald probably had a better absolute peak, but I'm not sure how long he was a top five WR, probably like 2007 to 2011. He led the league in catches twice and TD receptions twice, there is less black ink on his resume then you would think. Gore's playoff numbers are still very good, expanded over 16 games, are 1,300 yards and 10 TDs.
The "one time he had a good QB" is also an exaggeration. Warner had 4 1/2 good seasons with Arizona, and later Carson Palmer had 2 1/2 very good seasons in Arizona as well. Fitzgerald certainly had a shittier QB situation than a lot of HoF wideouts, but it wasn't like he was with a bunch of bums the entire time. On the flip side, out of a few Harbugh years and one year when Luck was healthy in Indy, Gore didn't play in many good offenses during his career.
Gore on four teams doesn't mean anything; part of the story of his career is that teams wrote him off as a old and he was still able to keep running on new teams.
Career AV:
Gore: 125
Fitzgerald: 126
Fitzgerald was probably a better player, but the gap is minimal and their HoF cases are very similar. Fitzgerald is more marketable and has more playoff highlights so people assume he has a much better case, but he really doesn't.