I must start by stating that I do have limited knowledge of the Colin Baker's years. I saw the first 2 or 3 episodes of the first C. Baker's story. Then Doctor Who went off the air in my area. I was not impress and for years believed all of the bad press on C. Baker. Even now the only others I have seen are "Vengeance On Varos", "The Mark of the Rani", "Revelation of the Daleks", "The Two Doctors" and "The Colin Baker's Years. I also have the audio drama 'The Sirens of Time". If you have not ever listen to the audio dramas or the missing stories on CD I highly recommend them. Plus I have read all I can from Colin Baker and others from that time.
I just don't understand the attacks on C. Baker. And yes lots of what I have read are attacks as he alone killed Doctor Who. No he will not find himself in most fans' top 3. He may be #10 on most lists, but someone has to be #10 unless you have a tie somewhere. But I'm not sure how much is C. Baker's fault and how much is John Nathana-Turner, the writers and/or the BBC lack of money and support. It seem that the BBC was ready to drop Doctor Who long before C. Baker came along. Kind of how CBS did Star Trek. You must understand that the gap between a low budget show and a fully funded show in the 60s was much smaller than in the 80s. Also the crews in the 60s was higher skilled at working with less than crews in the 80s who depend more on computers than their minds and hands.
Also many fans were still looking for a Tom Baker. If Peter Davison had stayed longer we all may be looking at C. Baker more positively. Davison did not give us enough time to get over the T. Baker hangover.
If there are others, or anyone, out there who feels that Colin Baker is being criticized too greatly please let me know. Sometime I feel that I am alone in defending him.