Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Everything that is happening in the wrestling world.
Post Reply
User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 20950
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by cero2k » Nov 10th, '21, 15:43

BRYAN DANIELSON: WWE WRESTLERS SHOULD HAVE 90-DAY NOTICE CLAUSE
src: https://www.f4wonline.com/aew-news/brya ... revolution

AEW's Bryan Danielson spoke publicly for the first time on the recent WWE releases in addition to discussing his own contract with AEW -- one he said will likely be his last.

Speaking with Ariel Helwani on the MMA Hour, Danielson said he believes that if WWE can release wrestlers with a 90-day clause, wrestlers should also be able to give a 90-day notice.

"One of the things I have always had a hard time with, and I’ve been fired from WWE twice so I kind of get this, is that it's one thing if somebody does something bad. But, for example, if you’re under contract with WWE and you’re not happy, or you’re not happy with the company, or whatever it is, if they can fire you and give you 90 days, you should be able to give them 90 days to be released from your contract. I just think that that’s fair".

Danielson said he doesn't think it's right that WWE is releasing talent and claiming they are due to budget cuts when they are more profitable than ever.

"They signed a lot of people to high-end contracts when AEW kind of started to keep people from going to AEW or whatever it is. But then they realized that AEW can’t sign all these people. So now, the people who have too many high-end contracts....if they feel like they’re getting paid more than they should be getting paid, then they’ll let them go. But you offered them a contract to be with you for three years or whatever. If you overpaid them, that’s your bad. And, you’re still a very profitable company," he explained.

Danielson said he is under a three-year deal with AEW, confirming he is able to work in Japan as long as he gets clearance from AEW and that the company is his top priority in terms of dates. Chris Jericho is the only other wrestler to compete in Japan while under an AEW contract, primarily due to the pandemic restricting overseas travel.

Previously, Danielson called the next three years the "climax" of his in-ring career.
Image

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 20950
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by cero2k » Nov 10th, '21, 15:44

If anything else, foreigners with working visas should definitely get a good head's up
Image

User avatar
Thelone
Posts: 430
Joined: Jul 9th, '19, 16:22

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by Thelone » Nov 10th, '21, 19:37

Those "budget cuts" are obviously a bit ridiculous to think about while they're doing massive profits every quarter. I guess it sounds better than "we've overspent for no name goofs so they don't join that other promotion and now that we see how they operate, we don't care anymore because they're no threat".

And like, isn't the 90-day clause a pretty old thing by this point? Wrestlers should know by now that even if you sign some long term contract, it could be terminated almost at will it seems like. I don't remember if it's Corny or someone else who said that if you sign a five-year contract and it can be cut every quarter after some kind of evaluation, well you just signed a 3-month contract that is renewed or not for another three, etc.

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 27378
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by Big Red Machine » Nov 10th, '21, 22:19

What Dragon is saying here is that talent contracts should allow them to give ninety-days notice at any point so that they can leave, but given the company ample time to wrap up their stories first.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Ultimate Gate 2013
ROH/CMLL Global Wars Espectacular: Day 3

User avatar
Thelone
Posts: 430
Joined: Jul 9th, '19, 16:22

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by Thelone » Nov 11th, '21, 09:24

Big Red Machine wrote: Nov 10th, '21, 22:19 What Dragon is saying here is that talent contracts should allow them to give ninety-days notice at any point so that they can leave, but given the company ample time to wrap up their stories first.
I get his point, but the contracts are so easily breakable that it feels like a non-issue really. I'm sure a wrestler can go to Vince, tell him that (s)he's not happy and wants to leave or whatever, and unless (s)he was an ass backstage or something, (s)he'll be on the next wave or releases a few months later (and still be paid for three more months afterwards doing nothing, because Vince is Satan obviously). The only person I can remember who wasn't released despite asking for a while was PAC, and I think there was something about him missing time for an injury.

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 20950
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by cero2k » Nov 11th, '21, 10:12

Thelone wrote: Nov 11th, '21, 09:24
I get his point, but the contracts are so easily breakable that it feels like a non-issue really. I'm sure a wrestler can go to Vince, tell him that (s)he's not happy and wants to leave or whatever, and unless (s)he was an ass backstage or something, (s)he'll be on the next wave or releases a few months later (and still be paid for three more months afterwards doing nothing, because Vince is Satan obviously). The only person I can remember who wasn't released despite asking for a while was PAC, and I think there was something about him missing time for an injury.
Did you not pay attention when Danielson, Rey rey, Brodie, FTR, Bennett, and others requested their releases? Just like PAC, some of them had their contracts frozen for almost a year or straight up denied a release. You have to be on a Lince Dorado level for WWE to be "sure, fuck off. Wait, who are you again?" One does not simply quit the WWE without repercussions, WWE will rather pay you to sit around than allow you to go to the competition.

@Big Red Machine You're right, I read it the other way, but once I saw the video it made more sense. I still think that WWE should work with a 1 month notice approach, unless the 30/90 day no-compete doesn't end your benefits.
Image

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 27378
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by Big Red Machine » Nov 11th, '21, 10:18

My understanding is that you still get your benefits through the 90 days (that's why your not allowed to work anywhere else. There was a time when it was optional. I know Raven waived it in 2003).

I think the 90 days is more fair. Some angles are going to take more time than 30 days to wrap up on a satisfactory manner.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Ultimate Gate 2013
ROH/CMLL Global Wars Espectacular: Day 3

User avatar
Big Red Machine
Posts: 27378
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 15:12

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by Big Red Machine » Nov 11th, '21, 10:19

The PAC situation is a little different, as he flat out refused to come to work. The others all made efforts to honor their contracts.
Hold #712: ARM BAR!

Upcoming Reviews:
FIP in 2005
ROH Validation
PWG All-Star Weekend V: Night 2
DGUSA Open the Ultimate Gate 2013
ROH/CMLL Global Wars Espectacular: Day 3

User avatar
Thelone
Posts: 430
Joined: Jul 9th, '19, 16:22

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by Thelone » Nov 11th, '21, 17:27

cero2k wrote: Nov 11th, '21, 10:12Did you not pay attention when Danielson, Rey rey, Brodie, FTR, Bennett, and others requested their releases? Just like PAC, some of them had their contracts frozen for almost a year or straight up denied a release.
WWE tried to accommodate Bryan so he could work for New Japan, I wanna say Rey and Lee were also injured and that's why they weren't granted their releases immediately, FTR got theirs when they started slandering the company on SoCiAl MeDiA (weren't they released on a random day without the usual "we wish them well"? Maybe I'm thinking of Zelina), and Bennett/Maria used WWE as a glorified vacation (one for rehab, the other to make babies) so they should be grateful instead of bitching endlessly about it whenever they can (it's mostly Kanellis to be fair, but still).
You have to be on a Lince Dorado level for WWE to be "sure, fuck off. Wait, who are you again?" One does not simply quit the WWE without repercussions, WWE will rather pay you to sit around than allow you to go to the competition.
If both parties are fine with that kind of deal, I don't really see the problem to be honest. This is pretty much what's been happening during the last year or so with the multiple waves of releases : Vince realized that Khan won't be turning his trash into gold, so he doesn't feel the need to hoard and overpay talent anymore (Khan will do it instead). Sure, you have the other side of the coin with guys like Moxley, PAC, FTR and others wanting out because they wanna work their art or whatever (all to a fault I might add), but they're most likely the exceptions to the rule.

User avatar
cero2k
Site Admin
Posts: 20950
Joined: Dec 16th, '10, 11:32

Re: Bryan Danielson: WWE wrestlers should have 90-day notice clause

Post by cero2k » Nov 14th, '21, 10:44

Thelone wrote: Nov 11th, '21, 17:27 WWE tried to accommodate Bryan so he could work for New Japan, I wanna say Rey and Lee were also injured and that's why they weren't granted their releases immediately, FTR got theirs when they started slandering the company on SoCiAl MeDiA (weren't they released on a random day without the usual "we wish them well"? Maybe I'm thinking of Zelina), and Bennett/Maria used WWE as a glorified vacation (one for rehab, the other to make babies) so they should be grateful instead of bitching endlessly about it whenever they can (it's mostly Kanellis to be fair, but still).
Never a missed opportunity to talk trash about AEW.
You can bring up all the excuses, but at the end of the day, they're all examples of people that asked for their release, and were not released until later when it's "WWE decision" to do so.
Thelone wrote: Nov 11th, '21, 17:27 If both parties are fine with that kind of deal, I don't really see the problem to be honest. This is pretty much what's been happening during the last year or so with the multiple waves of releases : Vince realized that Khan won't be turning his trash into gold, so he doesn't feel the need to hoard and overpay talent anymore (Khan will do it instead). Sure, you have the other side of the coin with guys like Moxley, PAC, FTR and others wanting out because they wanna work their art or whatever (all to a fault I might add), but they're most likely the exceptions to the rule.
It's not 'both parties are fine' when one side controls ALL the coins, there is no 'negotiation' for the majority of people that get released without a heads up. I'm 100% that many wrestlers don't like all the clauses in the WWE contract, but WWE doesn't negotiate contracts when they sign people in lots, you either sign and do what you're told, or get the fuck out before they release the hounds. There are MANY problems, let alone complete lack of fairness and morality, when you run a company like this.
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests