To start with the Blues are last in the NZ conference so I'd say that's a pretty good place to start when comparing their performance to the rest of the NZ teams. That being said, in defense of the Blues I guess one could argue they are 2 and 2 v NZ teams so maybe a case could be made they are middle of the road? Doubt it though......
The more subjective way I try and get a handle on things is to look at the catchment area and the squad. The Blues have the biggest catchment area, so in theory they have an advantage there. Their squad has a great deal of experience and current ABs:
In the forwards you have: Mealamu, Woodcock, Faumauina, Donnelly, Kaino, Braid, and Luatua (all past or present ABs, ex Braid who really deserves to have been one by now)
In the Backs: Weepu, Nonu, Saili, Halai, and Piutau
For me that is the basis of a team that should easily be winning more games than they lose.
The final point that should really be made is I only think you need to watch a team play to see if they are underperforming. On occasion the Blues have looked OK to good this year but most of the time they have looked poor and at times they simply look plain awful. There is something seriously wrong with this team, the franchise, the coaching, the spirit in the team. The Benji story, if you read between the lines, is a pretty good indication that there is something quite wrong at the Blues. (and of course Fekitoa's non-inclusion and subsequent stories coming out of that decision is another example - sorry not sure how long the Highlanders have got him for)
All that noted, I think it is fair to conclude that the Blues are not just underperforming, but are significantly underperforming, and have done for a few years now.
I hope things improve, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.
I would certainly accept most of what you say, if the whole "we have first dibs on player x because he's from our catchment" still applied, but the ability for any franchise to offer contracts to any player, makes the catchment size of any franchise, less relevant.
As for the number of All Blacks in the squad, I would say that with the exception of the Highlanders and possibly the Chiefs, the number of current or ex-All Blacks are pretty evenly spread, so it could be argued that the Crusaders and the Hurricanes should also be winning most of their games, but unfortunately, as the New Zealand teams play each other twice, and everyone else once, it makes it statistically unlikely that they all can do that ... perhaps that's where the lack of consistent form lies, as the All Black players aim to hit form for the test season, not the start of the super rugby season.
As for the Blues underperforming, I don't think it's fair to say that they are significantly under performing compared to the other NZ teams, when there was only a six point difference on the NZ conference table between first and last.
With regard to Fekitoa, the Blues don't seem to be too badly off for Centres and Outside backs, and you can't retain them all ... better that he goes to another NZ franchise where he can get the game time, than to either sit on the bench and receive limited game time at the Blues, or worse, head of to Australia, where he'd more than likely appear in a Wallaby jersey IMO.
I don't really have an answer to the whole Benji thing, I guess maybe Kirwan and co saw how SBW and Folau have gone (they took time to adapt too), and thought he was worth a punt ... I personally would have offered him a Seven's contract, and got him to learn the game that way ... maybe combine it with some ITM cup experience for the fifteens experience.
In conclussion, I agree that the Blues could do better, but they certainly aren't the side that couldn't buy a win of a couple of years ago ... I'm certainly not saying that Kirwan is the answer, or that there is or isn't discontent in the Blues camp (how would I know), but the coaching staff are relatively new, and deserve the chances (like the players) that contracts provide, to prove themselves