10 Most Polarising Stars In WWE History

These days, despite what WWE and the McMahons seem to believe, fan reactions in professional wrestling are hardly ever under the control of the wrestler and the company they work for.

Often, that’s just wishful thinking on their part - how many times have the WWE tried to get one of their pet projects over only to receive, at best, apathy, and at worst outright backlash and rejection?

That’s because, these days, there are two stories being told. The one in the ring - all the action, characters and gimmicks that make up wrestling angles and feuds - and the one outside of it.

Even after the rise of the shoot interview and the death of kayfabe, wrestling is still an insider industry. That second, backstage story is a knot of hearsay and secrets, just a clamour of unreliable narrators yammering to tell slightly different versions of the same tall tales.

Out of that whole tangled mess, we come up with a version of a wrestler that we consider to be the correct one. It’s up to us - no one else - how we react to that star. But let’s not forget how much of that is subjective, each of us having our own ideas about what constitutes acceptable real life behaviour and quality wrestling, a great character and sh*tty writing.

That’s how wrestlers become polarising creatures, as conflicting stories and skewed perspectives combine to create controversy. With that in mind, here are the ten most polarising stars in WWE history.

From all reports, Dave Bautista’s a pretty good guy. He's touted as being a smart, perceptive man with a shy streak, a heart of gold and a slight weakness for women, who came out of a troubled past to try one last time to make something of himself.

We didn’t know any of that back in 2004, though; he was just another green, clumsy bodybuilder hired for his look. Playing a two-dimensional musclehead heel in the Evolution stable, you could hear the cartoon dollar signs kerching in Vince McMahon’s eyes just looking at him.

WWE’s unusually masterful slow-burning babyface turn in 2005 kept him away from the feeding frenzy for a little while, but out from under Triple H’s arm Batista soon found himself swimming with smarks again. And they tore him to pieces, incensed with being fobbed off by yet another giant, awkward main eventer who couldn’t talk.

Batista’s unexpectedly powerful performance as an arrogant, blinged up bad guy in 2009/10 provided a surprising creative comeback. In contrast, Batista’s return as a generic, whitebread babyface in early 2014 couldn’t have been planned and executed worse if they’d tried, as the big guy fell foul of the Yes! Movement’s wholesale hijacking of the WWE main event picture.

The thing is, Batista (like most wrestlers) is best served when, to paraphrase Paul Heyman, the office accentuates his strengths and hides his weaknesses. Two years ago, WWE were woefully out-of-touch with what their audience would and wouldn’t accept in their main event babyface hero. Batista was no replacement for the ultra-over Daniel Bryan.

Way back in 2005, on the other hand, Batista got over as a fan favourite despite his limitations and inexperience through careful, adept storytelling that protected their star from criticism. In 2009 and 2010, Batista was over as a vicious, narcissistic villain because it was a character he was born to play. Whenever they’ve given him a little room to work as a bad guy, he’s usually surprised a lot of people.

However, even today people still argue over whether Big Dave is a worthwhile performer. Love him or hate him, Batista has made a significant impact on WWE in the last dozen years, but it’s all in the presentation.