To paraphrase the famous comedian, Rodney Dangerfield, some people just get no respect. When it comes to Star Trek, there are a few shows and films at the bottom of the pile that deserve to be there. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, Star Trek: Discovery, Star Trek: Short Treks, Star Trek: The Animated Series, and of course, Star Trek: Section 31.
Yet, anyone who claims Star Trek: Enterprise is bad is simply not telling you the truth. Enterprise is fantastic. It's a constantly engaging and consistent series that should've been the perfect swansong to the Brannon Braga era of Star Trek on the UPN (later CW) network. It was the prequel series of the franchise. The story that should've started it all. A series that was anchored by a sci-fi legend and, at the time, the biggest name Star Trek had ever pulled to lead a brand-new franchise.
After all, Patrick Stewart, William Shatner, and Kate Mulgrew were all, for lack of a better term, 'made' by Star Trek. Their successes came mostly after they appeared in the series. For Enterprise's leading man, Scott Bakula, he was already a well-established and beloved sci-fi actor. Other franchises made their captains but this series would have their captain make their show.
And it worked. Bakula played Jonathan Archer, the first captain of the NX-01 Enterprise, and did so brilliantly. He was a fun, captivating, and inciteful leader. A true captain for the people. One who did a lot to help bridge the gaps of bigotry in all of its forms. He was also the only captain who loved water polo and had a pet.
So Archer was pretty dope. Yet, some people still want to pretend the man wasn't great. Den of Geek actually went as far as to rank Archer as the worst captain in Star Trek history.
No matter what issues you have with Archer as a character, he never committed mutiny and was never held responsible for the death of his captain like you can with Star Trek: Discovery's leading woman, Michael Burnham. Her character was emotionless, uninteresting, and objectively untrustworthy in the early seasons. She always thought she knew better, and it quite literally cost thousands their lives because of it.
You don't need to think Archer is the best captain, as it's hard to say who really is, but the worst? With Burnham on the board? Absolutely not. What's even worse is that the fandom really enjoys Star Trek: Enterprise these days, but detests Star Trek: Discovery. How can you rank Archer below Burnham when one's show is objectively more enjoyed than the other?
It's just madness. Archer is clearly not the worst captain in Star Trek's television franchise.