Riot's criteria for nerfs doesn't mean jack
For those of you that didn't see Riot put out some framework for how they will view "OP" champs for nerfs and buffs
On 10.4 Amumu was well below the criteria for nerfs in Skilled, Elite play and completely irrelevant in pro play. Amumu was slightly OP in Silver/bronze but below the OP threshhold in Iron and Gold. In effect Amumu hits 1 half of 1 of 4 possible triggers for nerfs
On Patch 10.4 Senna has been pick ban in Pro play(100% presence of the 14 games on 10.4). She was well above the OP lines in both Elite and skilled play. She pretty close to being above the line for Normal play, boasting high presence and a nearly 52% win rate. Senna hits 3 of the 4 triggers for nerfs and is pretty close to being 4 of 4
On patch 10.4 MF was OP in both Elite/Skilled play, highly relevant and only not "OP" in pro play because she shares a role with Apehlios and Senna. She isn't "OP" in the lower elo simply because ADC Senna/Aphelios draw the ADC bans. MF is still above 30% presence in the lower elos and has a high WR. In effect MF hit 2 of the 4 triggers for nerfs and only dodged the other 2 because Senna and Aphelios are more OP and eat bans that would go towards her.
On Patch 10.5 Amumu is getting nerfed. On 10.5 Senna, MF and Aphelios aren't being touched. Well actually Senna is getting an indirect buff because she goes Swifties which are being buffed, but then again it's a small buff.
Conclusion: RIOT'S criteria for nerfs are completely meaningless. Riot has favorite champs and they get to be OP. Riot hates certain champs and even when they suck already Riot is gonna nerf them.
