The Triple H "Burying" Myth

[satchmokilnt]

ok. we get it. you're a major triple h mark, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.
its just that there is a hell of alot of evidence that points to triple h being a major burier of talent over his career. and many other people above have already posted examples of such times in great detail.

As others have said, from his burials of the hot properties of the time(radicalz, chris jericho, booker t, brock lesnar) to his verbal bashings of talent of the day.(his 'better match with a broomstick' line was completely unprofessional and just self serving.) hhh certainly does has previous.

you ask for evidence. well i strongly suggest you just have a look for some shoot interviews from over the years. the general perception in the industry on the whole is, though a very talented wrestler who would've/could've reached the top without politicking. his insecurities have made him feel the need to stand in the way of many wrestlers over the years. he is labelled by many as a backstabbing, two faced liar with a streak of real cowardice. which seems to wind up people even more. if this were one or two voices with a history of tall tales i could let it slip. but the truth is, that you'd find it alot harder to find industry voices who have good to say about the man.

Regardless the past is the past, whats done is done. he donned the suit, and seemingly hung up the boots. i thought all this shit may be in the past. but no. it came back once again, when he returned to destroy the summer of punk.(which seemed to purely be a vanity mission from hhh) there's no way him beating punk in the way he did, was the right thing for anyone.....aside from triple h. he killed the hottest angle in many years, dead in its tracks. and for what? just seemed like another bit of ego stroking from him and his grey haired buddy boy kevin nash.

i also have trouble with his current bit with taker.(which i cant believe UT is happily being part of) if anyone didn't know who'd won last years mania, they'd swear it was triple h. even in defeat he has to come across as the man. they've made taker come across as the weak desperate man who somehow fluked a win against the mighty game, and even then the underlying sentiment is 'he may have won, but triple h was the real winner. as taker had to be carried out. and only now has he returned. and returns seeking revenge. against the only man that matters.' Me oh my. talk about ego stroking! even at the end of his career he still bounds out of his suit to make sure everyone knows he's the top dog, always will be.

[RicSpade]

Honestly you can't really say Orton or Batista because both of these guys were apart of his backstage group, and when he put Batista over he was paling around backstage, in Ortons case, Orton was already a star and was a world champion through Benoit, so you can't put Orton as burying....

Now if you were to go to like Booker T. who was a top star in WCW, and you had him lose cleanly and not even thought of as a main eventer until he was away from triple h and given a goofy gimmick, yeah thats buried, or how him and HBK beat 5 guys who dressed like cheerleaders and only one of them survived with a gimmick all their own thats burying. or taking a Goldberg and beating him cleanly thats burying him based on his legacy....

I will admit that Hunter has lost to some of the newer talent like Miz and Truth, but think of how many times he beat Chris Jericho on a main event status. Punk lost to Triple H despite all of the interference to make punk look stronger it could be said that punk didn't want to look weak, but Hunter didn't want to lose to Punk either...

So did Hunter bury people? Yes, does he still do it? Not saying either way but you have to look at the underlined layers of the matter first...

[The Brain]

Originally Posted by comrade_mario

Booker T.

Went from being the hottest face in the WWE at the time into a feud with a dominant heel champion in a storyline that involved some racist undertones. He got his shot at the guy running him down on the grandest stage of them all, the stage was set for Booker to cement himself as THE number one face in the company and what happened?

Triple H took his moveset and finished him off with relative ease, sending Booker hurtling out of the main event scene and not recovering until the King Booker gimmick.

The story called for Booker to win, the stage called for Booker to win, the company needed a new face champion on Raw, but Triple H decided against it seems. The references to black people not being good enough for the top table, and Triple H proving that (in a kayfabe sense) by dismantling Booker is one of the most distasteful angles they ran last decade

Booker T was the hottest face in the WWE? I remember everyone being in total shock that he won the battle royal to earn the mania championship match. He didn't seem like a big enough opponent for Triple H at mania. So instead of being buried Booker was pushed to new heights with a title match at mania.

I don't recall any racial undertones in that feud. Triple H said he didn't think someone like Booker T should be world champion. He was referring to Booker being a common street thug and an ex con, which Booker was before entering wrestling. Race was never once mentioned. If you thought the angle was racist maybe that says something about your inability to look beyond race.

I will admit it would have been a nice moment if Booker actually did win the title. Regardless, he got a competitive world title match against one of the company's biggest stars ever at the biggest show of the year. Hardly a burial.

[Ryberg]

Originally Posted by satchmokilnt

ok. we get it. you're a major triple h mark, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.
its just that there is a hell of alot of evidence that points to triple h being a major burier of talent over his career. and many other people above have already posted examples of such times in great detail.

As others have said, from his burials of the hot properties of the time(radicalz, chris jericho, booker t, brock lesnar) to his verbal bashings of talent of the day.(his 'better match with a broomstick' line was completely unprofessional and just self serving.) hhh certainly does has previous.

you ask for evidence. well i strongly suggest you just have a look for some shoot interviews from over the years. the general perception in the industry on the whole is, though a very talented wrestler who would've/could've reached the top without politicking. his insecurities have made him feel the need to stand in the way of many wrestlers over the years. he is labelled by many as a backstabbing, two faced liar with a streak of real cowardice. which seems to wind up people even more. if this were one or two voices with a history of tall tales i could let it slip. but the truth is, that you'd find it alot harder to find industry voices who have good to say about the man. I still laugh to this day watching HHH in the old WCW days losing to Alex Wright. That's the only time I ever saw WCW not miss the boat like they did with Austin. HHH was a mid-carder at best until he started knocking the boss's daughter. Then all of a sudden he's a main eventer.

Regardless the past is the past, whats done is done. he donned the suit, and seemingly hung up the boots. i thought all this shit may be in the past. but no. it came back once again, when he returned to destroy the summer of punk.(which seemed to purely be a vanity mission from hhh) there's no way him beating punk in the way he did, was the right thing for anyone.....aside from triple h. he killed the hottest angle in many years, dead in its tracks. and for what? just seemed like another bit of ego stroking from him and his grey haired buddy boy kevin nash.

i also have trouble with his current bit with taker.(which i cant believe UT is happily being part of) if anyone didn't know who'd won last years mania, they'd swear it was triple h. even in defeat he has to come across as the man. they've made taker come across as the weak desperate man who somehow fluked a win against the mighty game, and even then the underlying sentiment is 'he may have won, but triple h was the real winner. as taker had to be carried out. and only now has he returned. and returns seeking revenge. against the only man that matters.' Me oh my. talk about ego stroking! even at the end of his career he still bounds out of his suit to make sure everyone knows he's the top dog, always will be.

I still can't wait for the day I hear on the news that Scott Steiner beat HHH within an inch of his life.

That's what I was saying about Punk earlier. For no reason other than ego, he "inserted" himself into a feud with Punk. Only to destroy the momentum WWE hasn't seen on a mainstream level in decades JUST so he could stroke his ego even more.

Yeah and the person who pointed out Shelton getting over on HHH. If I remember correctly, there were complaints from African American wrestlers about the WWE and Michael Hayes treating them badly and using racist language with them. So that was there attempt to say see we're PC. Once the bad press went away Shelton got squashed again until he left.

Other's he buried besides Booker T when they were HUGE and his ego couldn't take it: Jericho, Umaga, Great Khali, Chavo, Randy Orton (early) Carlito, Funaki, Kane, Steiner, Goldberg, and RVD. In most cases being squashed by HHH means you never recover.

I would have MUCH rather seen UT vs Mankind for WM! Those two had some EPIC matches. Yeah I agree on paper UT won last years Mania but HHH in reality won. We didn't see him taken out on a stretcher. Yeah VMK is still under some delusion (probably due to HHH whispering in his ear) that the WWE needs HHH to be seen in a ring or in a suit.

To me HHH is just a younger more scumbaggy Hogan! Both full of themselves and can't let go of the fact they're out of the limelight.HHH will end up doing to WWE what Hogan has done to TNA, which isn't a good thing. As much as I hate Cena I can say at least the guy worked hard for everything he got! HHH just married the boss's daughter and thats why he got his pushes. God can only wonder how bad Hogan would have been if he was with Stephanie.

The Undertaker- Makes careers
HHH- Buries Careers

[comrade_mario]

All I can say is to go back and watch the promos at the time. Triple H refers to Booker's 'nappy hair', says guys like him are supposed to come out and dance for guys like Triple H (reference to America's racist minstrel shows) before concluding that guys 'like Booker' will never be able to beat guys like him.

It's clearly playing on racist undertones, rewatch them and you'll see it.

While you're there watch the reactions Booker is getting from the crowd, he was ready to win the title and be a top face and Triple H crushed that and sent him back to the mid-card.

You won't see this because you're blindly following your point of view, bravo on saying that it's probably because I'm racist that I thought the promos were racist by the way. If you want to ask people to debate wrestling with you you need to be open to other's opinions and the idea that you might be wrong. At the moment it's like you're Triple H's kid wildly defending him against any insults

[drobs85]

I don't think Triple Haytchh puts over anyone. Here's the thing, I'm sure Triple h doesn't volunteer to lose so putting over someone to me means he openly volunteers or embraces the idea of losing to a particular person. He may have a little influence but not as much as he thinks or people seem to think. At the end of the day, there's a guy named Vince McMahon that makes those calls.

[Nate]

Originally Posted by The Brain

Booker T was the hottest face in the WWE? I remember everyone being in total shock that he won the battle royal to earn the mania championship match. He didn't seem like a big enough opponent for Triple H at mania. So instead of being buried Booker was pushed to new heights with a title match at mania.

You're right, he wasn't the hottest face on Raw when he won the Battle Royal. However, by the time Mania came around, he was crazy over. The feud was tailor made for the face to go over.

I don't recall any racial undertones in that feud. Triple H said he didn't think someone like Booker T should be world champion. He was referring to Booker being a common street thug and an ex con, which Booker was before entering wrestling. Race was never once mentioned. If you thought the angle was racist maybe that says something about your inability to look beyond race.

Strongly disagree there, man. I always balk at people who shout racism every ten seconds but this feud really did have a lot of racial overtones.



The guy who made the video is obviously quite retarded, but there were clearly some racist overtones there.

I will admit it would have been a nice moment if Booker actually did win the title. Regardless, he got a competitive world title match against one of the company's biggest stars ever at the biggest show of the year. Hardly a burial.

First off, I do agree. Nobody was buried. You and I seem to be one a few that actually understand the meaning of the word. However, I don't think Booker got as fair a shake as you make it seem. Booker should have won. Forget the subjective stuff about whether or not Book was big enough to win it, logic dictates that the feud was built for the face to win. If it was going to be just another token defense for Hunter, they should have built it up another way. Wrestlemania has long been the stage where dreams are fulfilled and with a feud booked like this(where someone is constantly degraded for not being worthy/never win the big one) that certainly should have been the outcome.

Also, I wouldn't exact call that match competitive. Booker sold a Pedigree for nearly half a minute and still succumbed to a 3 count. That shit didn't happen, even in the 80s.

[The Brain]

Originally Posted by James

This is from the horses mouth:

On Triple H burying him backstage when people cheered Kurt over John Cena – “Triple H obviously wanted to bash me because I was a better wrestler than him and I deserved to be in the spot that he was in but he was never going to give up, he’s Vince’s son-in-law.

“I had to deal with that stuff all the time. I’d wrestle Shawn Michaels and I’d get a little rough with him, then I’d get heat from Vince McMahon because I beat up on Shawn too much.

“So I’m like: ‘Well you know what, I’m tired of the two long-haired sissies. If they can’t go up against me then don’t put them up against me.”

You're joking right? First of all you say straight from the horse's mouth. Well that's one side of the story. I guess since a wrestler said it in a shoot interview it must be true. Keep in mind this is a guy who got upset when Randy Orton starting using a very basic slam in his matches that supposedly Kurt Angle has a trademark on. Besides this is referring to the feud with Cena. So if it went the other way around we could blame HHH for burying Cena right? Sounds to me like Angle tried to bury Cena.

CASE STUDY #1: HHH VS. KURT ANGLE (2000).

The Facts: HHH, Angle, and Stephanie were intertwined in a tri-angle that was the talk of the biz and a ratings machine, particularly among broads. All signs pointed to Steph leaving her storyline husband (HHH) for the sensitive "other man" (Angle). In the first known example of an HHH career-kill, he whined that no heterosexual woman would ever leave him, uh, I mean "his character." So after months of build, Steph inexplicably low-blowed Angle, allowing HHH to beat Your Olympic Hero in their big climatic no-DQ match at Unforgiven 00 (9/23/00).

The Prosecution: It made Angle look like a schmuck and did nothing to help HHH or Steph. Angle was in the middle of the biggest push any WWWFE wrestler had received in his rookie year (Euro Title, IC Title, King Of The Ring Winner), and this left him with less heat than an Abominable Snowman's taint. Even the trifling little fact that Angle won the World Title the following month didnt repair the damage HHH had done. The months of promos where HHH inferred that Angle was a homosexual didn't help Angle (or HHHs case) either.

The Defense: Screw Kurt Angle. After he won everything in his rookie year, what the hell was left for him to do? Besides, HHH has laid down for Angle a bunch of times. What about Royal Rumble 2001, which saw interference from Vince, Steph, and Trish before Steve Austin interfered and screwed HHH? Then there was No Way Out 2002, after the HHH/Steph storyline split. Angle beat HHH there after HHH got screwed by Steph the ref. It took HHH almost a full week to re-beat Angle to regain his status as #1 Contender for the World Title going into Wrestlemania 18.

The Verdict: Guilty. Kurt Angle is a once-in-a-blue-moon talent that got over DESPITE his visit to HunterLand. One could even suggest that Angle ruined it for the rest of them, because he stayed over anyway, wrongly implying that HHH didnt have "that much" power or that his shenanigans weren't "that bad." As for Hunter's WM18 match, we'll get to that shortly.


There you go

[/quote]

Yeah, there you go. With less than one year under his belt Angle got to work a program with the top guy and the owner's daughter. This feud in no way buried Angle. You said it yourself, he was champion a month later. This is when there was only one champion. How could that possibly be called a burial? Angle went on to be champion multiple times and was one of the biggest stars in the WWE in the 00s. If you're going to use an example of Triple H burying someone don't make it one of the most successful stars of the decade.

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

Originally Posted by PlayTheGame

Plenty of people on this forum vehemently believe that Triple H buries people to no end and is the worst "burying" culprit of all-time. However, many people such as myself don't believe this to be true, and see it for what it is: a phony myth created and pushed largely by ignorant and angry IWC members. I created this thread to address this myth and have a discussion about to hopefully talk some sense into people, and see if anyone actually has any kind of valid counterargument.

First off, let me say this: I understand that Triple H beats a lot of people, and probably has buried some in the past. But here's the thesis of this thread: Triple H has not buried any more people than any normal superstar of his caliber/position in the company as a top guy.

In order to prove my point, I'll attack the main argument of the believers of the myth- they believe that Triple H never puts anyone over and is constantly burying people in his way. Well, that's obviously not true, and I'll give you plenty of examples to support my claim. Let's start this off by taking a look at some of the past Wrestlemania's:

Wrestlemania 20- put over/lost to Benoit
Wrestlemania 21- put over/lost to Batista
Wrestlemania 22- put over/lost to Cena
Wrestlemania 23- (injured, did not compete)
Wrestlemania 24- put over/lost to Orton
Wrestlemania 25- defeated Orton (but he built up Orton during the preceeding feud, as Orton had dominated him, attacking him at his home; plus, Triple H was the face- it made sense for him to finally notch the win)
Wrestlemania 26- defeated Sheamus (but eventually lost the feud to him culminating at Extreme Rules, leaving after that due to an injury at Sheamus' hands)
Wrestlemania 27- put over/lost to Undertaker
Wrestlemania 28- most likely will put over/lose to Undertaker

So, on the biggest stage of the year, Triple H has largely (if not entirely) put over guys, often younger, and made them look great the past several years. A lot of these were title matches that HHH lost to his opponent, making them look like gold in the process. He & HBK gave Benoit a career-defining moment, he cemented Batista as a bonafide main-eventer, he tapped to Cena, he put over and added credibility to Orton in a surprise loss, he was involved in high-profile, elevating feuds with Orton & Sheamus that made them look great and they came out of them for the better, and, most recently, has added to the legacy of Undertaker's streak, providing him with yet another credible win (and he's most likely about to put him over for the third straight time at Wrestlemania this year, making 'Taker 3-0 against HHH at WM all-time).

Next, let's take a look at all of the talent that Triple H has personally built up over the past several years. Here are just a few BIG names that come to mind:

Batista-Groomed him in Evolution until he was ready to go over him in a high-profile, elevating feud. Helped him get to where he eventually got. Gave him A LOT of credibility. Personally showed him the ropes of the business, aiding him in getting to the top. Batista has stated in the past that Triple H & Flair were INTEGRAL in the success of his career.
Randy Orton- See Batista.
John Cena-Although they didn't interact that much, Cena always seemed to get the edge more often than not, often getting the wins. Furthermore, Cena ALWAYS looked good. Got a key win against HHH during his more formative main-event years at WM22 as previously mentioned with a very impressive submission victory.
Sheamus-Although he was beaten at 'Mania, he eventually took out HHH at Extreme Rules, winning the feud, gaining championship credibility, & putting HHH on the shelf for quite some time in the process. HHH has been a key supporter of Sheamus behind the scenes as well, aiding him in getting to the top.

I could go on and state more names, and I could probably even go on further in my argument, but I believe I've stated enough solid evidence in this opening post. Triple H often gets a bad rap for this "burying" myth, but it's simply unfounded and baseless. Like I said, he's definitely not done it any more than anyone else, like the Rock, Stone Cold, Brock Lesnar, HBK, Bret Hart, Goldberg, and pretty much every other top guy. And don't even get me started about TRUE buriers like a Hogan or Nash. Guys like that are in their own class. Triple H is no where near those guys and has the best interest of the business/the future of the WWE in the forefront of his mind at all times because he truly loves it. That's why he's currently a WWE executive in charge of scouting talent, because he wants to aid the WWE in its future.

The whole Triple H "burying" myth is just that- a myth.

Personally speaking, I am with you on a variety/majority of your points, so much that despite my disagreement on a few minor things I'd have to give you a green rep. But here's my take on the whole notion of accusing a wrestler of burying this guy or that guy and so on. We as the IWC can only speculate on what really goes on behind the "creative curtain" of the wrestling world, yes I know we all have varying degrees of experience with the business, some people that post on here are indy workers, bookers and what have you.

Some of us here are just ordinary fans that have probably met quite a few of pro wrestling's most prominent figures and know some people in the business and have read all the tell all books and watched all the retrospective DVDs and shoot interviews that are out there. I put myself in this category, the "ordinary fan". While I do have some suspicions and have indeed read up the various rumors and news tidbits that float around on the internet, I still remain a skeptic about much of what I hear, I even suspect sometimes that folks in WWE and TNA themselves stir things up by helping to get some of these rumors out there. Call me a conspiracy nut or a lunatic if you must, but think about it like this the business of professional wrestling is built on false pretenses, and these days with so much of it being "exposed" via the internet, things have to be said and done to work around such a thing.

In the past, I would just lash out at folks and make assumptions but this time I am not going to do that, I thought you made some very good points, a lot of people want to vilify Triple H at every free opportunity they can get. And he's definitely had quite a few major losses at WrestleManias to prove that his character doesn't always come out the very best. In my mind though, I don't care if he is married to the boss' daughter, the guy is a physical phenomenon and one of the most determined people I've ever seen get into a wrestling ring. I've actually become a bigger fan of his in recent years than I was when I was younger but even back then through the less than bright times in his career like the Terra Ryzing persona, feuds with mid-90s embarrassments like Duke Droese and Henry Godwinn, and of course the squash against the Ultimate Warrior at WrestleMania XII, the guy has convinced me that he belongs where he does in the pantheon of other wrestling legends.

What Triple H has done to keep his spot in the business though, well there's a lot of room for speculation on what really goes on behind the scenes, and again I'm not going to assume things here PlayTheGame so I'm going to ask what your relationship to the wrestling business is? I mean all your good points aside, we can speculate all we want about who the true saboteurs of the wrestling business are however there's a lot of room for debate on what you said about Hulk Hogan. Same goes for Kevin Nash, and I will get to that after I speak on Hogan.

Yes, I'm a fervent Hogan mark, so much that it might strike irony with some that my display name is not the "HulkAMark" or some other variation on his name, and while I do scratch my head at some of the feuds he's had in the past i.e. Billy Kidman, I don't believe that he's this saboteur to the degree people say he is. Do I disagree with those that say he has an ego? Absolutely not. I do think Hogan has an ego but he's just one ego amongst many others in a realm where egotism is a prerequisite for the job. Anything where you are a public figure and you're seen on a television screen or in other media you can bet ego will be involved. Most people don't pay for pay-per-views, merchandise or live event tickets to get modesty, we want to see people who have personalities that are bigger than ours and physical abilities that are greater than ours.

The reason I defend a lot of the things said about Hogan is because from what we hear on the internet and what people are so quick to believe just boggles my mind. Such as Hogan's creative control clause, while I don't doubt he had the ability to veto a lot of calls that were made involving him, I also think that if he had creative control to the ability that it was rumored, then incidents like The Bash At The Beach 2000 controversy would never have happened. And to be honest, I don't think he'd have ever lost the WCW World Title after winning it from Ric Flair in the first place, with a creative control clause, I am sure he could have held that World Title for every day he was contracted to that company. People who also state how Hogan prevented the rise of stars like Steve Austin should also stop and think for a second about other stars that could have helped Austin's case in that company. Ric Flair and Randy Savage could have at any time given Austin the rub in WCW but that never occurred either. In fact Austin and Savage wrestled in a US Title tournament back in 1995 (when Vader got stripped of the title) with Austin going over. Savage advanced to wrestle Flair in the tournament and both were double DQd from the tournament.

In the first place, I wondered why Flair and Savage were competing for a secondary title in the first place, but think of it like this, imagine the momentum boost Austin could have gotten by going over both Savage and Flair in that tournament. Yes, I do think it sucks that Austin didn't go any further in WCW, but when you look at how other big names were going over him towards the end of his run there, I find it very hard pressed to point a finger solely at Hogan. Yes things worked out better for Austin in the long run (as we all know of course) but people like to act as if the WWF immediately capitalized on WCW's supposed ineptitude when they signed him. Which we all know isn't the case because by the time Austin came to WWF, he was given a tired prop in the form of the Million Dollar Belt and had they kept him in that role as The Ringmaster for too long, who knows if "Austin 3:16" would have ever become a colloquialism in pro wrestling.

Incidents like Hogan's feud with Billy Kidman, I will admit were weak, the whole booking of that WCW Millionaires Club Vs New Blood angle was sub-par to say the least. In my mind if Hogan was booked as a heel again in his Hollywood persona and Kidman as the underdog face, we could very well have seen something intriguing. Could Hogan have vetoed going heel again? It's very possible, but when you look at all the other veterans being pushed as faces, who really knows what was going on behind the scenes. Nothing annoyed me more than seeing these young guys being pushed as spoiled brat heels when that should never have been the case, but considering that this was towards WCW's end who really knows who was calling what shots. Whenever people bring up Hogan's creative control and how he uses it to run roughshod, I always call them out and tell them that places like WWE and TNA shouldn't ever hire him or bring him back if they are that concerned. In fact since his post WCW career, Hogan's gotten more accolades in WWE (title wins and victories over big name stars) than he ever has in TNA, and supposedly he's the guy calling all the shots in TNA. Go figure, right?

Which leads me to my point about Kevin Nash I wanted to get to. Some people and I am not saying this you're one of them, but I swear that when some people watch Rey Mysterio in action in WWE, they think that this whole underdog persona with him was a WWE plot invention. It was absolutely not.

Back in WCW during the late 90s, Nash and Mysterio got into a feud and while yes there were instances where Nash got over on Mysterio, in the long run Mysterio was able to gain measures of revenge on Nash and also hold his own against other larger opponents like Scott Norton and Bam Bam Bigelow. Mysterio's tenacity against larger opponents started in WCW and granted while they didn't do as much with him as maybe some would like, he had competed against guys like Ric Flair for the World Title and had some notable moments in that company. Had he never received that type of push in WCW, who knows if WWE would have ever tried to utilize that quality in his character. Yes, I also know some people hate the idea of him losing his mask during that time but hey he agreed to it, a lot of people make these decisions themselves and we can't just go and blame WCW, NWA, TNA, WWF/E every time something like this happens. I think if Nash truly wanted to bury Mysterio, he'd have never given him the time of day to have a feud in the first place.

Overall, I really do like your post, really do. But my philosophy is this, the wrestling business like anything else that one can be a fan of is a little too oversimplified and what really goes on behind the curtain is uncertain. Being just the ordinary fan, all I can say about what goes on behind the scenes is I know that I don't know what's REALLY going on.

Anyway a good read and I have to give it a positive rep, even with the few and very minor disagreements I had.

[TM Punk]

I love how people relate burying someone to wins and losses, its cute. Truth is though, sheamus not winning at mania' did not bury him. He didn't deserve a win at mania yet. The feud continued afterwards, and HHH put him over huge. Sheamus can always hang his celtic cross on the fact that he put HHH on the shelf for a year.

More claims about the burying people myth is that HHH refused to put people over from the period between 2002 and 2004. Its true that people weren't going over him, but I highly doubt it was all his call. WWE was in the midst of a talent crisis on the raw roster. Rock, and Austin were gone. Shawn michaels had just come back and wasn't 100% sure of himself. And honestly, most of the talent was on the smackdown roster. HHH was the number 1 guy on Raw, and the number 1 guy in the company. When hogan did it in the 80's, no one called it burying, he was bringing all of the money in. Same here with HHH. People wanted to pay to see him get his ass kicked. He didn't get his ass kicked, so people wanted to see it even more. That's not burying, its good for business. Than the minute new stars were built, or people were ready to take that next step, he got his ass kicked by them, and people loved it.

The only burying that happened was done to WCW guys. Booker T, scott steiner, and goldberg 1 after another falled at the hands of HHH. Was that really HHH's decision though? C'mon.