ProWrestling Fans WWE TNA Forum

Go Back   ProWrestling Fans WWE TNA Forum > Wrestling > General Wrestling

General Wrestling Any non-WWE/TNA wrestling discussion goes in here. This includes wrestling history.

what does a no complete clause stop wrestlers from doing?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 14 Jun 2010, 02:36 PM   #1 (permalink)
Young Noob
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 50
Rep Power: 8
JackJack is on a distinguished road
Default what does a no complete clause stop wrestlers from doing?

i know the question sounds dumb and i know it stops them from competing, but does it stop them from appearing on other shows?















EXAMPLE: HBK who is still under 90 day no compete clause turns up on TNA tonight and joins the band. Would this break his no compete clause as he hasn't done any wrestling?
JackJack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jun 2010, 02:37 PM   #2 (permalink)
Fresh Noob
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 11
Rep Power: 0
Born To Be An Asshole(HSM) is on a distinguished road
Default

i think what it is he cant show up on any other company within 90's or its a law suit i wanna say
Born To Be An Asshole(HSM) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jun 2010, 02:43 PM   #3 (permalink)
Fresh Noob
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 47
Rep Power: 0
dxrulz is on a distinguished road
Default

yes because he cant do anything wrestling wise for 90 days.mr Kennedy had that or would have gone to TNA a lot faster.check his youtube video on not competing for 90 days.
dxrulz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jun 2010, 02:48 PM   #4 (permalink)
Jobber
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 450
Rep Power: 8
Superior Quality 85? (PTSF) is on a distinguished road
Default

If Michaels did that, he would get sued for everything he's worth if he competed under the no compete clause because it is still under 90 days
Superior Quality 85? (PTSF) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jun 2010, 02:52 PM   #5 (permalink)
Fresh Noob
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 25
Rep Power: 0
7AP?-WWE IS THE BEST is on a distinguished road
Default

they're not allowed to be in anything physical sport or pro-wrestling show like tna until the 90 days are over.































HBK's 90 days aren't over so if he goes to tna (which would I don't see happening), WWE would sue Shawn for breaking the 90 days.































Brock broke his 90 days when he left WWE wrestled in Japan for few years, Brock WWE sue which other, I think Brock won so he was able to wrestle anywhere but he choose MMA.































Hurricane Helms 90 days a where done this month so he's in the indys
7AP?-WWE IS THE BEST is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jun 2010, 03:00 PM   #6 (permalink)
Fresh Noob
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 26
Rep Power: 0
Microwave is on a distinguished road
Default

Pretty good answers already, so I would just like to add a few points:































-A no compete clause can work two main ways, one is a strict no-compete, which means no appearances or wrestling of any kind. Another and more common is no compete or promote certain brands, (usually ROH and TNA, though occasionally New Japan and AAA are thrown in).































-The second way is more common so people can still make a living working in the indy promotions, though there are a few names that have been under the strict 90 day clause (Dean Malenko, Raven, and Rob Van Dam come to mind)































-There is a way around it, and that is by buyout, similar to an athlete. It does happen, but it isn't common. Happened more with ECW guys going to WWE and WCW, since ECW could use the cash.
Microwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jun 2010, 03:03 PM   #7 (permalink)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,598
Rep Power: 0
steve is on a distinguished road
Default

The 90 no compete clause means they can not appear at all on any wrestling show for 90 days. This stops wrestlers from jumping ship. Back in the 90's they did that alot.
steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do you think they should really get rid of the rematch clause? $$$????????$$$ General Wrestling 5 06 Apr 2010 12:38 PM
Since when did you have to use your rematch clause for the Championship the night you lose it? chaos General Wrestling 2 03 Apr 2010 02:30 PM
What happened to Chris Jericho's rematch clause ? Simply Edgehead General Wrestling 4 03 Apr 2010 02:22 PM
Do you think Dreamer might go to TNA after his no compete clause is up? Xena ? General Wrestling 5 19 Mar 2010 05:32 AM
Why are rematch clause hardy used anymore? hbk_619_fan General Wrestling 6 25 Feb 2010 02:39 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:19 PM.

Attribution:
Powered by Yahoo Answers



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 © 2011, Crawlability, Inc.