Who has 'the biggest shovel' Ever?

[S.J. Maximus]

Please excuse the title but I decided to use a metaphor to introduce a topic that has been lingering in my mind for quite some time now. One of the most common terms on Internet wrestling forums is "burying", which has most recently been used frequently to describe Triple H's involvement in the current WWE product. Everyone has their opinion on who buries who and how unfair it is and whatnot but my question is who do you think is the worst of them all? Regardless of backstage politics or anything, who do you think is the least willing to lose, therefore the most dominant (kayfabe) wrestler in the history of pro wrestling?



Although Triple H and Hulk Hogan are two really popular choices, my top 2 has to be Stone Cold Steve Austin and Randy Orton. Since reaching main event level, neither man has been willing to give anyone the rub needed to become a top-tier talent. Austin kinda did it for Foley, just like Orton kinda did it for Kofi until completely stopping it. Austin however, allegedly refused to job to Hogan or Lesnar and never passed the torch before retiring. He "took his ball and went home" because he was no longer the focal point of the product in 2002, which is the true definition of a glory-hog man with a big shovel who does nothing but bury.

 

[Skinsley]

I'm sorry but its clearly obvious that the biggest culprit here is John Cena.
He has Squash matches and kills momentum in an instant. Brodus Clay has squash matches because he needs them to portray his character....Cena does not!
Orton has matches where he at the very least allows the other tallent to get their fair share in to atleast show what they can do....the times when its just RKO and DONE! is part of Ortons Character in which the RKO can literally come from NOWHERE!!
Mark Henry is perfectly entitled to a Squash match over John Morrison the way things are going.....but what did he do? He made JoMo look pretty strong before beating him and I actually enjoyed that match surprisingly.
My vote is John Cena...but when it comes to in HISTORY...probably best to think of some of the Multiple YEAR reigns that used to happen back in the day...im sure all the Squashing and burials were much harsher back then.
On another note.... Burried needs to be defined a little better.... its being used for absolutely anything now.
Some randomers on forums seem to think that even mocking another superstar like giving Sheamus a Potato is considered Buried! And it gets on my tits.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I'm sorry but its clearly obvious that the biggest culprit here is John Cena.
He has Squash matches and kills momentum in an instant. Brodus Clay has squash matches because he needs them to portray his character....Cena does not!
Orton has matches where he at the very least allows the other tallent to get their fair share in to atleast show what they can do....the times when its just RKO and DONE! is part of Ortons Character in which the RKO can literally come from NOWHERE!!
Mark Henry is perfectly entitled to a Squash match over John Morrison the way things are going.....but what did he do? He made JoMo look pretty strong before beating him and I actually enjoyed that match surprisingly.
My vote is John Cena...but when it comes to in HISTORY...probably best to think of some of the Multiple YEAR reigns that used to happen back in the day...im sure all the Squashing and burials were much harsher back then.
On another note.... Burried needs to be defined a little better.... its being used for absolutely anything now.
Some randomers on forums seem to think that even mocking another superstar like giving Sheamus a Potato is considered Buried! And it gets on my tits.

This is hilarious. Give me three names that Cena has buried. I bet you can't even name two. Cena has helped elevate numerous wrestlers and to suggest otherwise is asinine.

 

[Lionshare]

This is hilarious. Give me three names that Cena has buried. I bet you can't even name two. Cena has helped elevate numerous wrestlers and to suggest otherwise is asinine.

Uhmmmm the nexus?? thats seven guys in just one run!!!!
But to me it has to be HHH, just look at the past raw, he buried the whole roster!, seriously what the hell is that. Remember this is the guy who said he was never gonna get pin by Y2J, and now is the total focus point of raw, even though he barely wrestle anymore, and if he does he just bury the next upcoming wrestler in line to be a main eventer.

So yeah, he is a buring machine, thats not even funny anymore.

 

[Skinsley]

LJL:
Based on the posters first comments he or she considers Austin and Orton to be the Biggest "shovels".
Although I dont agree with what seems to be His or Her definition, based on those two superstars previously labeled my answer is John Cena.
So at the same time I dont disagree with you.

 

[CleverName51]

My vote goes to HHH, in 02-05 he had the WHC and more or less, kept the focus on himself thru the entire show. during that time frame, only HBK, Goldberg, Orton and Benoit would hold the WHC as well as HHH. With the exception of Benoit losing the title or Orton, every person who held the WHC would lose it back to HHH. During this time, HHH beat EVERYONE on the roster. He killed pushes for Jericho, RVD, Steiner, Nash, Kane and others.

He's my pick.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Uhmmmm the nexus?? thats seven guys in just one run!!!!
But to me it has to be HHH, just look at the past raw, he buried the whole roster!, seriously what the hell is that. Remember this is the guy who said he was never gonna get pin by Y2J, and now is the total focus point of raw, even though he barely wrestle anymore, and if he does he just bury the next upcoming wrestler in line to be a main eventer.

So yeah, he is a buring machine, thats not even funny anymore.

You mean the HHH who made Hardy into a main eventer? You mean the HHH who let Sheamus put him on the shelf for almost on the year? That was that guy?

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

My vote goes to HHH, in 02-05 he had the WHC and more or less, kept the focus on himself thru the entire show. during that time frame, only HBK, Goldberg, Orton and Benoit would hold the WHC as well as HHH. With the exception of Benoit losing the title or Orton, every person who held the WHC would lose it back to HHH. During this time, HHH beat EVERYONE on the roster. He killed pushes for Jericho, RVD, Steiner, Nash, Kane and others.

He's my pick.

How did he kill Jericho's push? I like to hear imaginary declarations come to life. Also, did you watch the horrible matches Steiner and Nash had with him. They needed to be nowhere near the title.

 

[culantro]

You mean the HHH who made Hardy into a main eventer? You mean the HHH who let Sheamus put him on the shelf for almost on the year? That was that guy?

he let him put him in the shelf only because he wanted vacations, don't fool yourself, and don't get me wrong HHH has put over like 2 or 3 wrestlers in his career, but has buried a lot more...

 

[SickJames]

Who has the biggest shovel?

....

*looks down with a big smile on his face*

I DO!!


But as it relates to burying ppl not our penises in people, I'd have to say the bookers. Who book Cena to lose unclean. It fucks everything up after a time where you had Austin, Rock and other top faces lose clean here and there some more often than others but its more rare today and there wasnt one guy not even Austin made to look like a fucking superhero when it comes to not losing clean.

Clean is clean even in matches that allow weapons, and especially when WWE acquired WCW and ECW talents you had to have top guys lose clean

There were more guys sharing top spotlight than just one when others shouldve gotten it, there was damnear always a competition for number 1, but not today where Orton gets fucked as if Cena's all that matters and the messed up part is it isnt Cena's fault, but the fact that he could say "hey, let this guy beat me clean." does make me have to semi-hate him for that specific thing

not as a person or performer



We need more Jerichos and Rocks

I remember DDP saying how Savage deciding that DDP should go over him one night to which it got a huge pop thrilled him and honored him, we need more this


I recall in the Attitude Era, a DVD, one top star said the mentality is if I get you over you and I can make money in the future

Not if I look invincible and worry about my merchandise sales business is good

 

[Dynamitekid2012]

Austin didn't refuse to job to Lesnar... He wanted it to make sense the way he lost. He wanted a story behind it, not just a random loss. As for the Hogan thing, who can blame him? How can you put over Hogan in his fifties while you're still in your prime. It can be done, but it would have to be done in a way that was appropriate.

As for the question...

Triple H. Are you kidding me? No one even comes close! HHH buried Jericho on multiple occassions including his first run as undisputed champ. Then, when Jericho came back as the savior, I recall Triple H making slights and basically ruining his momentum. Booker T is another guy. He should have been champ for a period of time, and yet nope, Triple H beat him at WM clean and Booker never got back to that kinda spot again. He's buried just about anyone he's faced. Hell he even tried to bury Cena, talking about how he can't wrestle. He's buried so many guys that its hard to even ponder how many guys he has. And this is just the stuff in front of the camera, who knows what else he has done backstage.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

I tend to look at this as whose politicking backstage kept others down... hence 'burying them'.

In the WWE/F, I'd have to say Shawn Michaels back in his spoiled, obnoxious brat mid-90's stage. He would openly say that he 'wasn't laying down for anyone'. He pushed the klique into the best positions and best programs at the expense of the rest of his undercard. He buried everyone that wasn't in his inner circle, went out of his way to make himself look good at the expense of his opponents in the ring, even if they were in his inner circle. Just look at his WM match with Nash as an example of that. Michaels flopped around so much, and got himself so much sympathy from the crowd at the expense of the face in the match (Nash), that the WWF was forced to scrap all their post WM plans immediately after the match and make him face. Putting himself in direct competition with Nash as the top babyface instead of putting him over by keeping himself the strong heel he was supposed to be, it helped undermine Nash's title reign, which resulted in lesser opponents for Nash (Mabel???) and the reign itself ending prematurely (Nash would have been champ longer with the stronger reign that was initially planned).

Subsequently, in WCW the backstage booking tandem of Nash/Hogan was great for keeping guys down, and burying them as a result. There's too many examples here, but look no further than Bret Hart's experience under Nash's booking in WCW. Putting him in lesser matches when they should have been taking advantage of his real life notoriety from how he left WWF. The nonsensical storylines he was given. The entire way he was booked was a burial (and don't point to the titles he won there as an example of how he wasn't buried, because it was abundantly clear at that time that titles in WCW were meaningless).

Yeah I know these aren't really traditional examples of burials, and both guys were still successful despite being buried... but my point is they could have had so much more success in those situations if it wasn't for selfish wrestlers backstage who were more concerned with themselves being over than what was best for business.

 

[The Brain]

I would love to amend the rulebook to make the term buried illegal to use on the forums because so many people just don’t get it.

I'm sorry but its clearly obvious that the biggest culprit here is John Cena.
Burried needs to be defined a little better.... its being used for absolutely anything now.

As is proven in your own post. You didn’t give any examples as to who Cena buried.

My vote goes to HHH, in 02-05 he had the WHC and more or less, kept the focus on himself thru the entire show. during that time frame, only HBK, Goldberg, Orton and Benoit would hold the WHC as well as HHH. With the exception of Benoit losing the title or Orton, every person who held the WHC would lose it back to HHH. During this time, HHH beat EVERYONE on the roster. He killed pushes for Jericho, RVD, Steiner, Nash, Kane and others.

He's my pick.

So five men holding the title over a three year period is not enough? This is the problem. People think if a guy doesn’t become world champion he has been buried. Nothing could be further from the truth. There was a time when just working with the top guy in the company was considered a push despite not beating him. Actually that is still the case; most people just don’t realize that.

As for Triple H, let’s see who he buried. Jericho. I could have sworn I saw Chris Jericho walk down the aisle in front of over 65,000 fans in the SkyDome during in the main event of the biggest show of the year with the WWE title over one shoulder and the WCW title over the other. That hardly seems like a burial to me. Scott Steiner. Really? Steiner was awful in WWE and that was not Triple H’s fault. Steiner got a main event angle as soon as he joined the company and he blew it. Kevin Nash. Sure let’s have the middle age guy who can barely go a month without injuring himself go over the top star. RVD and Kane. They got to have a main event program with the world champion. Just because they didn’t become champ doesn’t mean they were buried. By your logic I could argue that had RVD or Kane beaten Triple H they would have buried him. This is not sharing time in kindergarten. No one said that everyone gets a chance to win. If that happened who would ever stand out and how would we separate the great from the good from the mediocre?


There are much better examples of “guys with the biggest shovel” than Cena and Triple H. How about Scott Hall? Here’s a guy who was absolutely loaded with talent and charisma but could not keep himself clean long enough to ever really take his career to the next level on his own.

The biggest shovel has to go to RVD. In 2006 he won the WWE title and simultaneously held the newly revived ECW title. He was the poster boy of the new ECW and he was enjoying popularity he hadn’t had since the old ECW. He was on top of the world. Less than one month later he threw it all away when he got arrested on drug possession charges. What a dumbass. Who knows how far he would have gone had he not buried himself with his own shovel.

I hate when people blame someone else for their own shortcomings. Think about this; how did Hogan, Austin, HHH, or Cena every get in the position where they could supposedly bury someone in the first place? What gives them that reputation? Is it because they are the most successful. If no one was able to bury them how are they able to bury others?

 

[Defekt]

HHH tapped to Benoit at WM 20, dropped the title to Batista at WM 21, and lost to Cena in WM 22. You can't dispute that HHH played a large role in making those guys, especially Batista.

John Cena has had competitive matches with practically everyone on the roster. Although he usually comes out on top, he always makes his opponents look good, and elevates them in the process. Calling Cena a shovel is ludicrous.

I would call Hogan a shovel. The fact that he refused to job for Orton at SummerSlam 2006 is a good example of him refusing to put anyone over.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

HHH tapped to Benoit at WM 20, dropped the title to Batista at WM 21, and lost to Cena in WM 22. You can't dispute that HHH played a large role in making those guys, especially Batista.

John Cena has had competitive matches with practically everyone on the roster. Although he usually comes out on top, he always makes his opponents look good, and elevates them in the process. Calling Cena a shovel is ludicrous.

I would call Hogan a shovel. The fact that he refused to job for Orton at SummerSlam 2006 is a good example of him refusing to put anyone over.

Hogan put over any damn heel he faced during his Hulkamania run so I have no idea what you're talking about. Hogan putting his foot on the rope after Randy Orton gave him a RKO put him over more than anybody realizes.

 

[justtxyank]

I tend to look at this as whose politicking backstage kept others down... hence 'burying them'.

In the WWE/F, I'd have to say Shawn Michaels back in his spoiled, obnoxious brat mid-90's stage. He would openly say that he 'wasn't laying down for anyone'. He pushed the klique into the best positions and best programs at the expense of the rest of his undercard. He buried everyone that wasn't in his inner circle, went out of his way to make himself look good at the expense of his opponents in the ring, even if they were in his inner circle. Just look at his WM match with Nash as an example of that. Michaels flopped around so much, and got himself so much sympathy from the crowd at the expense of the face in the match (Nash), that the WWF was forced to scrap all their post WM plans immediately after the match and make him face. Putting himself in direct competition with Nash as the top babyface instead of putting him over by keeping himself the strong heel he was supposed to be, it helped undermine Nash's title reign, which resulted in lesser opponents for Nash (Mabel???) and the reign itself ending prematurely (Nash would have been champ longer with the stronger reign that was initially planned).

Agree wit this, even as an HBK fan. Though I would quarrel a little with the idea that he "buried" people per say. He typically refused to put people over, but HHH took it to a whole new level. (I also happen to be a fan of HHH. In fact, I like very member of the Kliq except Waltman)

Subsequently, in WCW the backstage booking tandem of Nash/Hogan was great for keeping guys down, and burying them as a result. There's too many examples here, but look no further than Bret Hart's experience under Nash's booking in WCW. Putting him in lesser matches when they should have been taking advantage of his real life notoriety from how he left WWF. The nonsensical storylines he was given. The entire way he was booked was a burial (and don't point to the titles he won there as an example of how he wasn't buried, because it was abundantly clear at that time that titles in WCW were meaningless).

I want to dispute this BIG time. First of all, one of the biggest myths of all time is that Nash/Hogan were the bookers of WCW. This is simply not true at all when Bret got there. Hogan had creative control but was not a booker, and Nash wasn't a booker until mid 1999 at the earliest. The idea that it was Nash/Hogan burying Hart is pure myth. It's up there with "Nash booked himself to end Goldberg's streak." Just not true.

Also, WCW titles didn't mean anything? You couldn't make this argument at all until arguably the world title reign of Bret Hart. The US title meant a lot in WCW and was battled for by MAIN EVENTERS and HALL OF FAMERS when Hart was holding it. His reigns were surrounded by guys like Goldberg, DDP and Lex Luger. 1997-1999, the titles in WCW, even the TV title, were treated with a lot of respect. The World Title picture started getting convoluted in 1999 after the finger poke of doom, DDP winning the belt when he wasn't supposed to, hotshotting it to Sting and then back to DDP in one night, etc.

Yeah I know these aren't really traditional examples of burials, and both guys were still successful despite being buried... but my point is they could have had so much more success in those situations if it wasn't for selfish wrestlers backstage who were more concerned with themselves being over than what was best for business.

Don't disagree here. Story of pro wrestling. Selfish jerks keep other guys down who get treated as martyrs, when in fact if they'd had those spots history tells us they likely would have ended up being selfish jerks as well.

Austin is a great example. This is a man who got held down in WCW, treated like crap in the USWA, etc. He hits it big in the WWF after busting his butt and proceeds to go on a several year streak of never taking clean losses, quitting when he doesn't like what he's asked to do, refusing to put guys over because of personal grudges, etc.

 

[justtxyank]

So five men holding the title over a three year period is not enough? This is the problem. People think if a guy doesn’t become world champion he has been buried. Nothing could be further from the truth. There was a time when just working with the top guy in the company was considered a push despite not beating him. Actually that is still the case; most people just don’t realize that.

This is a great statement and what that people forget. It drives me crazy. I look at the "Hollywood" Hogan era of Hogan in WCW. People say he buried everyone at the time but that is just a joke. He made Luger and DDP for example look like a million bucks.

You don't have to beat a guy to get a rub and you don't have to win a title to be getting the right push. Another example, the TV Title series between Benoit and Booker T in WCW. People think WCW was stupid for keeping the belt on Booker T and not giving it Benoit. But Benoit got such a rub out of that feud. WCW blew it after the feud imo, but both Booker T and Benoit emerged from that with tremendous respect from the crowds and either man was believable as a real threat to anyone on the roster.

When Austin lost to Bret Hart in the 1990s, Hart made Austin.

Losing a match or not winning a title does not equal burial.

 

[mr.nobody]

I want to dispute this BIG time. First of all, one of the biggest myths of all time is that Nash/Hogan were the bookers of WCW. This is simply not true at all when Bret got there. Hogan had creative control but was not a booker, and Nash wasn't a booker until mid 1999 at the earliest. The idea that it was Nash/Hogan burying Hart is pure myth. It's up there with "Nash booked himself to end Goldberg's streak." Just not true.

Nash became the Booker in mid to late 98 and he did in fact book himself to end the streak. The plan was for the nwo to reform and Goldberg to be the guy to go against them like a one man army. But the plan went south, Nash admits this on the wwe legends roundtable 15th year anniversary of the nwo.

 

[frostbite2819]

ummmmm how in the hell did HBK ever bury anyone?
Yeah he didnt lose a LOT from 95-98 or so but how many guys did he make look like a total star in the process? Kevin Nash would have never even been champion if it was not for HBK making him look so good.
Vader. Mankind. Scott Hall. 123 Kid. Pretty much any babyface OR heel that Shawn faced in that time period came out of the match all the better, despite losing, just for being in a match with HBK. Hell I for one would add Bret to the list too because HBK gave him his best matches. Not the other way around.
So what he didnt lose as champ, he was champ!!!!

And really the same could be said for Cena, just in a different way.
Edge and Punk were both high midcard guys, on the brink of greatness, and after facing Cena, became top WWE guys.

If someone is being buried they are not on tv at all OR on ppv cards.
(like Y2J before his WCW contract expired)

If you were a top-level mid card wrestler, and WWE gave you the chance to
lose at Wrestlemania to HHH or Cena, you should be honored that Trips or Cena want to wrestle you at all at the biggest show of the year. That is a sign of respect of your wrestling abilities.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

I want to dispute this BIG time. First of all, one of the biggest myths of all time is that Nash/Hogan were the bookers of WCW. This is simply not true at all when Bret got there. Hogan had creative control but was not a booker, and Nash wasn't a booker until mid 1999 at the earliest. The idea that it was Nash/Hogan burying Hart is pure myth. It's up there with "Nash booked himself to end Goldberg's streak." Just not true.

Notice I never said when he got there, but Nash was booking a lot earlier than you claim, and he absolutely buried Hart with non-sensical booking. Look no further than Hart's own book for all the proof of that you need (and keep in mind that Hart doesn't even say Nash was intentionally burying him)

And Nash did book himself to end Goldberg's streak. I'd love to see some evidence to the contrary if you have it.

Also, WCW titles didn't mean anything? You couldn't make this argument at all until arguably the world title reign of Bret Hart. The US title meant a lot in WCW and was battled for by MAIN EVENTERS and HALL OF FAMERS when Hart was holding it. His reigns were surrounded by guys like Goldberg, DDP and Lex Luger. 1997-1999, the titles in WCW, even the TV title, were treated with a lot of respect. The World Title picture started getting convoluted in 1999 after the finger poke of doom, DDP winning the belt when he wasn't supposed to, hotshotting it to Sting and then back to DDP in one night, etc.

Yeah you can. The WCW title was hotshotted a lot in 98. It just doesn't look like it as much considering how much worse that got in later years. The only strong reign that year was Goldberg's. Hogan, Sting, Savage and Nash only had quick reigns that just added to their final title numbers.

The US title was handed around even worse. Hart alone was booked as a 3 time champ in 1998 alone. Here he was, the hottest guy in the business coming in at the tail end of 1997, a multiple time World champ throughout the decade... and he was booked as a guy that not only had to compete for the promotions secondary title, but as a guy that couldn't even hold that? By the time 1998 was over, he was just another guy.

That is keeping a guy down, and not letting him become what he could have been. That is in essence, burying him, and even if Hogan/Nash didn't have the book the entire time, it was their backstage influence that was keeping guys like Hart out of the spots where they could have done the best business, both for themselves and the company as a whole.

If you have to book Hart for the US Title, he should have been booked as a strong champ who deserved to be fighting for the World title, but was being blocked from it by the NWO because of their ties with his nemesis in that other organization. Allow Hart to fight his way through the NWO to get back to the top as he's putting over the US title at the same time (because the NWO wants all WCW titles, and want to take this one from Hart), until finally the sympathy factor for the now mega face Hitman is too great, and the top guy in the NWO (the champ) has to step in to put him down.

 

[justtxyank]

Notice I never said when he got there, but Nash was booking a lot earlier than you claim, and he absolutely buried Hart with non-sensical booking. Look no further than Hart's own book for all the proof of that you need (and keep in mind that Hart doesn't even say Nash was intentionally burying him)

And Nash did book himself to end Goldberg's streak. I'd love to see some evidence to the contrary if you have it.

I won't argue about the Nash as booker thing further. Too many differing accounts on the matter. Either way, I have always said Hart was under utilized in WCW.

Yeah you can. The WCW title was hotshotted a lot in 98. It just doesn't look like it as much considering how much worse that got in later years. The only strong reign that year was Goldberg's. Hogan, Sting, Savage and Nash only had quick reigns that just added to their final title numbers.

The US title was handed around even worse. Hart alone was booked as a 3 time champ in 1998 alone. Here he was, the hottest guy in the business coming in at the tail end of 1997, a multiple time World champ throughout the decade... and he was booked as a guy that not only had to compete for the promotions secondary title, but as a guy that couldn't even hold that? By the time 1998 was over, he was just another guy.

In 1998 WCW had 5 world title reigns. One of them (Savage) was only a transitional champion. (Nash techincally was as well but let's skip him for a moment as his reign ended in 1999) WWF had 4, including one that was only one day just like WCW. In 1999 the WWF had 12 world title reigns.

So I guess titles didn't mean anything in either company at the time right?

Next let's talk about the US title that got "hotshotted" in your mind.

We had DDP, who was one of the hottest names in the company losing it to Raven who they tried to establish as a top heel. We then got Goldberg who went on an undefeated streak. He only lost the belt because he became the world champion and vacated the US title. Bret Hart then won it. He lost it to Lex Luger, who was one of the top faces in the company (why I have no idea) and then quickly won it back from him. Ultimately losing it to DDP who by then was a main eventer, having feuding with Hogan and then won it back from him.

I do not dispute that Bret Hart was booked poorly. I do not dispute that he should have been in the world title scene. But I do dispute that titles meant nothing at this time in WCW. You had to be a main eventer to get the US title in WCW at this time because the roster was so full of superstars.

I never can figure out why WCW is held to standards that the WWF/E never was. OH THEY HAD 5 title reigns in one year! Hotshotting! That's why WCW failed and the WWF won! Nevermind that the next year the WWF did more than twice that many title reigns!