Maybe I'll give it another shot. Deep Space Nine, launched around the same timeframe, had a similarly weak start. In retrospect, I'm not sure I'd have gotten into it -- or forgiven it some truly dreadful filler episodes -- had I not been pre-sold on Trek by years of TNG. DS9 found its footing around the end of Season 2 and got really good around Season 4 and beyond.
Maybe I owe it to myself to give B5 another go at some point.
Both B5 and DS9 were well worth watching. And both had pretty ehh pilots. (And I'm got going to even touch accusations that the similarities weren't coincidental :-))
I pretty much agree with your take on DS9 even though I ultimately think it became one of the better Trek series.
B5 continued to have some pretty clunky acting in some cases and low-rent special effects but, given your tastes expressed in other posts, you'd probably enjoy it. My only caveat would be that it's somewhat one of those "mystery" shows (run off to the discussions about what this revelation meant) and I'm not sure how well that translates to after-the-fact binge viewing.
I can handle "what did that actually mean?" types of shows, but only if the mystery had some internally logical consistency to it, i.e., it's not just a mindfuck for mindfuck's sake.
A good example would be early-series Lost: lots of interesting mysteries left open to interpretation, giving the impression of more to come, and of a consistent logic to the way things were going to unfold. Bad example would be late-series Lost: it became pretty obvious they'd written themselves into a corner about halfway through the series, so they started making up increasingly convoluted ways to tie it all together, eventually winding up, as far as I can tell, somewhere in the Dr. Who universe.
Maybe I owe it to myself to give B5 another go at some point.