|
rotinaj posted:Yo, you know who sucks? That's a weird thing to say, in my opinion. Like, why would you even think that in the first place.
|
#
?
May 3, 2024 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:31 |
|
|
Erin M. Fiasco posted:This isn't a good road to go down. There's a lot that's extremely weird, from the tone that seems to indicate you're looking for specific people to get mad at that aren't the people actually implicated to "stickin' by her man". Please keep your ire directed at the people actually named in this case. Fair enough. I disagree with y’all’s interpretation of what I am trying to say, but no big.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2024 18:41
|
|
|
I personally would not be wildly speculating about the motives and intentions of a wife of an abusive man with little actual evidence and knowledge.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2024 18:48
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:Fair enough. I disagree with y’all’s interpretation of what I am trying to say, but no big.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2024 19:39
|
|
|
Erin M. Fiasco posted:Please keep your ire directed at the people actually named in this case. You know what, the more I read about this case, the more I believe that this Vince McMahon isn't an upstanding guy
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 02:20
|
|
|
Shard posted:I just looked into it, looks like his ban was lifted at the end of last year I had no idea he was that young. I'm sure being on Rumble and hanging around with Tate adjacent Adin Ross will help him grow.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 02:52
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:Fair enough. I disagree with y’all’s interpretation of what I am trying to say, but no big. Are you talking about the general idea of partners (usually cis straight women) who uphold the sick system of abuse in power structures like the WWE by choosing to look the other way when they have some awareness of cheating or other harmful behaviors? They too are victims who face ugly choices like protecting minor children from emotional and financial fallout of a divorce or becoming the primary target of their partner’s abuse (if they aren’t already). Add the social pressure and expectation to portray a “perfect” marriage and home life and extraction is not easy, even for someone with the kind of support system, familial and financial, we assume the partner of a high ranking corporate leader has. These are complex discussions that are outside the scope of the thread. I will delete if needed.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 14:22
|
|
|
Given Gable Steveson and Drew Gulak were released in the past few days, along with that COO getting got, there definitely feels like some house-cleaning being done on the WWE side of getting rid of anyone with any stench on them. I also think it's worth noting that while Laurinatis signed onto Vince's arbitration statement, radio silence from the WWE side. IANAL and most likely none of us are, but I do think that shows that the two sides are not working together and WWE's going to be looking to settle their way out of this ASAP.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 15:18
|
|
|
I'm sure that's how WWE wants it to look but that's going to be a pretty hard sell as long as Nick Khan still works there and the biggest stars in the company are still in contact with Vince.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 15:21
|
|
|
They were released because they were not valuable. If your crimes are not enough to drain you of value you're fine
Gumball Gumption fucked around with this message at 15:40 on May 4, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 15:24
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:They were released because they were not valuable. If your crimes are not enough to drain you off value you're fine this is true, brock is 100% coming back
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 15:35
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Given Gable Steveson and Drew Gulak were released in the past few days, along with that COO getting got, there definitely feels like some house-cleaning being done on the WWE side of getting rid of anyone with any stench on them. Brock is still under contract and actively talked of being used.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 16:15
|
|
|
WWE has no desire to clean itself up internally. If anything the company would hire more prominent sex pests and dare you to quit watching.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
JUNGLE BOY posted:this is true, brock is 100% coming back Yep. Drew was cut because he's a house show NXT TV job guy and now he's useless for that. Gable was not getting over when they tried his debut. He was either written off as a failed experiment months ago or put back in the intensive training.(which makes it extra funny they blocked him from the Olympics tryouts) Brock's music is going to hit and the crowd will go nuts.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 16:32
|
|
|
Drew is the same case as that British guy who was cut during Speaking Out. He admitted it instead of denied it and the company cut him for it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 16:44
|
|
|
JD McDonagh is still in the dominant heel faction on Raw because he's Finn's friend, after all.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 16:55
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:Drew is the same case as that British guy who was cut during Speaking Out. He admitted it instead of denied it and the company cut him for it. Although a slightly less serious case than Jack Gallagher's own behaviour IIRC. But you do get the impression WWE would rather people denied everything, or at least just stay silent, seeing that people like Jordan Devlin are still under contract.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 16:55
|
|
|
Having admitted assaulters on the roster increases their legal risk so they're really easy to let go.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 17:03
|
|
|
MassRafTer posted:Drew is the same case as that British guy who was cut during Speaking Out. He admitted it instead of denied it and the company cut him for it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 17:22
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Given Gable Steveson and Drew Gulak were released in the past few days, along with that COO getting got, there definitely feels like some house-cleaning being done on the WWE side of getting rid of anyone with any stench on them. There is a lawyer posting itt
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 17:28
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:They were released because they were not valuable. If your crimes are not enough to drain you of value you're fine Yeah. If this were not the case then orton would be gone like gulak
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 17:32
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Given Gable Steveson and Drew Gulak were released in the past few days, along with that COO getting got, there definitely feels like some house-cleaning being done on the WWE side of getting rid of anyone with any stench on them. Drew Gulak was definitely cut because they don’t want the bad press from Ronda. Gable Steveson just stunk on ice and they cut bait.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 18:44
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:I also think it's worth noting that while Laurinatis signed onto Vince's arbitration statement, radio silence from the WWE side. IANAL and most likely none of us are, but I do think that shows that the two sides are not working together and WWE's going to be looking to settle their way out of this ASAP. To be clear, the below is not trying to justify anyone's actions, but to explain their likely motivations. As a general rule, I wouldn't try to divine a party's willingness, or unwillingness for that matter, to settle based on the public filings. WWE is caught in a situation where any move they make is going to remind the public that they're a party to this lawsuit, which they've spent quite a bit of effort trying to avoid over the past few months. They're also in a different position from Vince or Laurinaitis. Vince, and to a lesser extent Laurinaitis (since the latter's career is most likely over no matter what happens), need some sort of public vindication if they ever want to do anything public-facing again in their lives. WWE, on the other hand, is not facing the same level of existential threat but, at the same time, are also under the pressure of needing to keep as much of a lid on this matter as possible, given that they're still operating as an ongoing concern. To that point, any settlement they would make, because it's likely to be quite substantial, is something they're going to disclose to their shareholders in some form or another. Finally, WWE wants to settle insofar as they want this case to go away, but if they settle, but Vince doesn't, then settling doesn't do them any good, since, at the end of the day, they're a party to this lawsuit because the employees of WWE were complicit to varying degrees, and they can only distance themselves from Vince to a degree, not entirely.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 18:52
|
|
|
Reminder that they released Enzo Amore, not because of the sexual assault allegations, but because he didn't tell them that he was under investigation.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 18:57
|
|
|
haunted bong posted:Reminder that they released Enzo Amore, not because of the sexual assault allegations, but because he didn't tell them that he was under investigation.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 20:29
|
|
|
Smasher Dynamo posted:To be clear, the below is not trying to justify anyone's actions, but to explain their likely motivations. I think we're in agreement for the most part. Laurinaitis is a minnow caught up with two whales, there's very little money you can get out of him now and almost none you're going to be able to get out of him in the future because he has no future prospects. His only value to Grant was flipping on Vince and his only value to Vince would be shutting the gently caress up; the SOS he threw out a few months ago seems to have been received by Vince given the latest public statements but who knows what's actually been discussed behind closed doors. I think we also agree that WWE is very interested in settling and has zero interest in this ever seeing the inside of a courtroom. Vince is different but trying to decipher if he'll want to settle or fight is probably a fool's errand. As you mentioned the amount that WWE will have to pay is going to be disclosed to shareholders, I know settlement terms often aren't announced but if it's going to have to be disclosed then there's probably a chance that it'll end up public one way or another, and if that's the case then it'll set a bar for what to expect from Vince's side going forward. By all means correct me if I'm wrong. Your last paragraph is where we slightly differ. WWE wants to make a big show of being able to say to any investors and sponsors that they are fully separated from Vince McMahon. (To which there's the obvious retort of why they still employ his son-in-law in a high functioning capacity and just had his daughter front and center in their most public event, but a company talking out of both sides of their mouth is par for the course.) Being able to settle and publicly throw Vince under the bus and put all of the blame on him is going to be of utmost importance; under no circumstances do they want to be at the same defendant's table as him. In reality they probably won't be able to have their reputation fully independent of Vince's until either he's dead or all of his relatives and foot soldiers are gone from the company, but that's what happens when someone is front and center for half a century. In terms of motivations, if you're on Grant's side do you negotiate with WWE and Vince together as one entity, or do you separate them knowing the WWE side will want to settle whereas Vince may not? What's the value in either of those two tactics? I think the arbitration argument is going to fail so what kind of time table does that put us on? Finally, how's the baseball doing? It's got to have been more than a decade since the Sonics took part and my posts are long gone to the archive, I can't believe you've kept it going this long. This ain't the place for such chat but I'm just curious.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 20:38
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Your last paragraph is where we slightly differ. WWE wants to make a big show of being able to say to any investors and sponsors that they are fully separated from Vince McMahon. (To which there's the obvious retort of why they still employ his son-in-law in a high functioning capacity and just had his daughter front and center in their most public event, but a company talking out of both sides of their mouth is par for the course.) Being able to settle and publicly throw Vince under the bus and put all of the blame on him is going to be of utmost importance; under no circumstances do they want to be at the same defendant's table as him. In reality they probably won't be able to have their reputation fully independent of Vince's until either he's dead or all of his relatives and foot soldiers are gone from the company, but that's what happens when someone is front and center for half a century. I don't think anyone here likes it, but WWE has done a hideously effective job of separating themselves from Vince McMahon in the public's eye. Just look at the blowback that Tony Khan got for the Harvey Weinstein comments, which were in no way unfair. At this point, their goal is to make this suit go away, and cutting a separate deal with Grant doesn't accomplish that on its own. It may still happen, just because I can't imagine they want to go to discovery on this case, but they've already thrown Vince under the bus as much as they're able to. As far as Vince being able to get the matter into arbitration, the argument in his motion appears to be centered around the idea that, even if the confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses of the NDA aren't enforceable, and there's a pretty good chance they aren't, then those clauses aren't important enough to render the entire agreement void, and the arbitration clause should still survive as there is a severability clause, which sounds like a very boring and technical argument and, in fact, is a very boring and technical argument. Figuring out whether Vince is right would require me actually looking stuff up, which I don't want to do.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2024 21:05
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/WrestlePurists/status/1786945738133413968?t=mVS3FVeFQ-A8cCJkz77wPg&s=19quote:Several NXT talent made claims that Drew Gulak was a ‘bully’ who would often target injuries during matches with talent that were recovering from minor injuries at the time. surprise he was just Bill DeMott 2.0
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 05:06
|
|
|
No wonder HHH was so pissed off about having to fire him
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 05:49
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Seems like any NDA surrounding illegal behavior should not be legal. Trade secrets, fine. I agree wholeheartedly, an NDA to cover up crimes is in itself criminal behavior.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 06:22
|
|
|
All these stories and yet he remained on TV up until Rousey said something.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 07:25
|
|
|
HHH hired, was friends with, and stood up for DeMott
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 07:28
|
|
|
think about this.  the ts together are an n
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 07:37
|
|
|
I wonder who will be Bill DeMott 3.0
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 10:31
|
|
|
Testekill posted:I wonder who will be Bill DeMott 3.0 I'm sure that Hunter is already on the lookout for the next bitter washed up never was
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 19:01
|
|
|
We're probably on Bill DeMott v193.0 The whole company is just decades of bullying and abuse
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 19:28
|
|
|
Bullying and abuse during training sadly is not just a WWE problem though NXT 100% has issues that only would happen cause of the toxic culture in WWE
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 20:11
|
|
|
but did you guys hear the crowd in France and how it was so loud they broke decibel records and then how everyone clapped for Triple H backstage for doing such a good job and then they made a billion dollars from one show and it was their best week ever?????
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 22:56
|
|
|
Prokhor Zakharov posted:I'm sure that Hunter is already on the lookout for the next bitter washed up never was What's X-Pac doing these days?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2024 14:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:31 |
|
|
X-Pac is actually kind of cool now.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2024 14:55
|
|