There are more than 1 factor to a "well designed champion".

Look, just because one champion isn't exactly not aids to play against, it's doesn't mean they are "poorly designed". Generally speaking, a champion design should be about 5 things:

1.Kit's relation to lore/theme Well done: Teemo, Kled, Ekko and Azir. Yes fucking teemo. His kit does pretty much exactly what his lore says, even if it's garbage and it's toxic. Poorly Done: Aatrox

2.Kit's ability (Is it not just a shitter X? Is it fun to play? Good, it's a champion that people would actually play?) Well done: Yasuo, Lee sin, Riven, Zed (Lc$bigplay$) Poorly Done: Aatrox, Garen, Xin Zhao.

3.Ability to play versus (Counterplay) Well Done: Yorick (new) Poorly Done: Aatrox (If his lifesteal was actually good and not garbage holy fuck....) Azir, old Yorick.

4.Does playing against the champion feel fair? Well done: ... I don't know? Poorly done: Whatever people are qqing about :^) Jk, Yasuo, zed, Aatrox, Riven are big offenders. Juggernauts in general are not really fun to play against neither.

5.Healthy? Balanceable? Well done: New Yorick, I don't really know actually? Poorly done: Aatrox, Rengar, Master Yi. Mordekaiser, garen.

So yeah, stop saying a champion is poorly designed just because of one factor, many should count. For example, Aatrox is a complete piece of garbage. Kit fails to do whatever the lore says, is toxic, literally only allows statchecks and doesn't have any redeeming factors other than ult's animation and how cool dark flight (Q) looks like.