Bruce Blank 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 In regards to the "He was fire"/"I got my release" topic. If he was just given a standard WWE release from his contract you KNOW he'd have a 3 month/90 no compete clause like more or less everyone else. And that would have kept him off TNA TV. The rest? bleh spin, lies and truth all mixed into a confusing mess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
buffybeast 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 Kurt said he hasn't used pain meds for three years? Did anyone's bullshit alarm go off upon reading this? Now, I'm not backstage or know the details of wrestlers' lives. However, I've read from multiple places that Kurt had a nasty pain pill addiction that pretty forced WWE to fire him. Also has Kurt paid any attention to his body at all during the last year? He's lost an ass load of mass due to the WWE drug policy against roids. If half of what Kurt said in this interview is true, then he has a right to be angry. You can't just work people to no end without some consequence. But he won't take any responsibility for his own issues which is sad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dobbs 3K 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 For the last time, they "3 years" thing was already corrected by TNA...they say 18 months. Oh well, we'll get to see Angle vs Joe in TNA, so that will make all this bickering worth it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bob_barron 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 In regards to the "He was fire"/"I got my release" topic. If he was just given a standard WWE release from his contract you KNOW he'd have a 3 month/90 no compete clause like more or less everyone else. And that would have kept him off TNA TV. The rest? bleh spin, lies and truth all mixed into a confusing mess. They waived the 90 day thing b/c they wanted to sever all ties with Kurt Angle. For the last time, they "3 years" thing was already corrected by TNA...they say 18 months. Still bullshit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hunter's Torn Quad 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 In regards to the "He was fire"/"I got my release" topic. If he was just given a standard WWE release from his contract you KNOW he'd have a 3 month/90 no compete clause like more or less everyone else. And that would have kept him off TNA TV. The rest? bleh spin, lies and truth all mixed into a confusing mess. They waived the 90 day thing b/c they wanted to sever all ties with Kurt Angle. Some people still don't seem to realize just how big of a statement that is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BUTT 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 I thought the 90-day thing was an option, like you can collect pay for 90 days and not work, or you can work elsewhere and forgo the severance pay. I was under the impression that Angle chose the latter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Chaos 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 I thought the 90-day thing was an option, like you can collect pay for 90 days and not work, or you can work elsewhere and forgo the severance pay. I was under the impression that Angle chose the latter. Yeah, that's what I thought too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bruce Blank 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 LMAO if this is like any other corporate clause then it's not optional on the part of the employee but of the company. They would chose if they enforce it or not - yes they'd have to pay him for 90 days but seriously if it was Kurt coming to them saying "I want out, I'm going to explore other options" you know they'd stick him with 90 days. Brock got this ridiculously long one (years) and Angle is definitly more valuable to them than Brock was so there is no way they would not give him a 90 clause if they granted him a release. Now if he was fired and they wanted to sever links with him and everything then that's different. Either way it's not Kurt's choice but the WWE's choice, I've dealt with plenty of those clauses. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hunter's Torn Quad 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 Brock got this ridiculously long one (years) and Angle is definitly more valuable to them than Brock was so there is no way they would not give him a 90 clause if they granted him a release. Now if he was fired and they wanted to sever links with him and everything then that's different. The fact they didn't give him no-compete clause speaks volumes. They didn't even want Kurt tied to them through something that could only benefit them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Chaos 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 HTQ, is Meltzer actually saying now he didn't have a no compete clause? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hunter's Torn Quad 0 Report post Posted October 20, 2006 HTQ, is Meltzer actually saying now he didn't have a no compete clause? The fact Angle signed with TNA less than a month after getting fired proved that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
