DB may not be legally allowed to win the WWE Title

[d_henderson1810]

...at WMXXX.

Someone on these boards made an interesting observation.

What if WWE is legally obliged to give Batista the title at WMXXX, because of his contract?

It got me thinking.

What if Batista wins, and the fans blame WWE, yet they couldn't give Bryan the belt at Mania even if they want to.

Contracts are important in the business world. If you don't follow it to the letter, you can be sued by the other party.

I have heard that wrestlers have all sorts of clauses in their contract. Apparently Brock demanded limited dates, and what dates they would be. One rumor is that the Streak can only end by a Wrestlemania opponent hand-picked by the Undertaker himself to end the Streak.

So, Batista has come back, and would want certain guarantees to re-sign. What if he demanded that he win the Rumble, and win the title at WMXXX? Remember, Bryan wasn't in the title picture when Batista came back, so he may have not even have been considered.

If this was in the contract, and WWE don't book Batista to win the title, he could sue for breach of contract, and would win a lawsuit. My understanding is that WWE approached him, not the other way around, so Batista holds the whip hand.

I can't imagine that Batista would come back, when he could do movies, unless he was promised the title at some stage. What if that title reign is to start April 6, 2014?

WWE may be in a no-win situation. Either break a contract, or piss off the fans.

What if C.M. Punk left because he had a "main-event at Wrestlemania" clause in his contract, and he left because the WWE didn't meet their obligation? It would then look bad if they then pissed off Batista as well, if he is contracted to win at WM, and they put the belt on Bryan instead.

Not saying there is anything to this, just don't get your hopes up, that a Daniel Bryan title reign at 'Mania is such a sure thing.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I doubt that Batista has it in his contract because something like that would have most definitely leaked out by now. At the very least, there'd be reports out regarding a "rumor" that Batista is contractually guaranteed a title run. If a guaranteed title run was part of any wrestler's deal, I think we'd have heard rumors over the years at the very least. As I said, something like that, whether or not there's any validity to it, would make the dirtsheets; that's especially true when you consider the negative response Batista received after winning the Royal Rumble. The dirtsheets would grab that rumor and run with it because the report would garner a ton of reads that'd generate buzz all over the internet. It's not impossible for it to be true, but it's highly unlikely.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

If he does, and if he's a smart businessman (which he seems to be, selfish but smart), he will decide to not win the strap. It'd make his brand look horrible in the long run.

Plus if it was, I'm guessing they would have booked "winner of Orton/Batista goes against winner of HHH/Bryan" to get around it.

Although if I were WWE, I'd certainly "leak" information that it is in Batista's contract. Just to, you know, stir the pot.

 

[DDevine]

Usually when there are title run stips, it only guarantees a number of runs, or a single run, or whatever, it doesn't guarantee dates or amount of time. Or at least, that's what I've heard...

 

[chibet]

interesting point. interesting point. man o man is batista vanilla as hell though these days. Bring back the full on 2010 heel batista going into wm 26. Probably the only time I've enjoyed his work

 

[ocekit]

wouldn't that be a major break in kayfabe ?

Kayfabe's not as big an issue as it used to be. WWE has taken to mixing kayfabe and reality on a regular basis and is known to subtly "leak" information to dirt sheet writers that may or may not be true in an attempt to garner interest and get people talking.

 

[d_henderson1810]

If he does, and if he's a smart businessman (which he seems to be, selfish but smart), he will decide to not win the strap. It'd make his brand look horrible in the long run.

Plus if it was, I'm guessing they would have booked "winner of Orton/Batista goes against winner of HHH/Bryan" to get around it.

Although if I were WWE, I'd certainly "leak" information that it is in Batista's contract. Just to, you know, stir the pot.

But you're assuming that Bryan was always part of the WWE Title plan.

I don't think so. It was set for Orton v Batista for WWE Title when Batista came back. Bryan was added later due to public pressure.

So, if a wrestler is a smart businessman, they would book themselves to greatest advantage, such as a title run, especially at WM. I don't think Batista cares how his brand looks (considering his brand looks bad just for being in the match), because he came back for himself, like a lot of wrestlers do.

What, you don't think Hogan, Kevin Nash, Triple H and others have had amongst their contract demands, title reigns?

Batista doesn't care if Daniel Bryan is champion, only DB's fawning fans do, so DB wasn't even considered when signing Batista to return.

Just because your every waking moment is spent thinking of goatface, it doesn't mean everyone else's is.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Meh...

He was maybe promised but dont believe that anyone has in contract that he must be champion on Wrestlemania. Booking doesnt work like that and it showed pretty clear here why. It was original plan to be Batista and Orton for title but they overastimated Batistas drawing power and underestimated Bryans. So at the end they are giving the people what they want to have them happy at Wrestlemania. So they maybe promised him that but you cant for certanly book things like that for sure.

Besides it can say "title reign". That could possiblly be after Mania because most people think that even if Bryan wins title he wont last that much as champion...

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

I would think that even if the WWE had done that, they can restructure the deal to make it work. Maybe they can give him more money or better next years mania.