Samantha Irvin may have stepped away from WWE, but that doesnt mean shes free to show up in AEWor anywhere else in wrestling. Former WWE Superstar and licensed attorney David Otunga is weighing in, and according to him, that massive non-compete clause keeping her off TV could be totally legit.
During his appearance on TMZs Inside The Ring, Otunga responded to rumors that Irvin is under a two-year WWE non-compete clause following her exit. While many fans assumed such a clause would be impossible to enforce, Otunga made it clear that it depends entirely on how the deal was structuredand whether shes still being paid. When asked if WWE could really block Irvin from working anywhere else for two years, Otunga dropped this:
He made it clear that if WWE is still paying Irvin during this period, they have every right to keep her from showing up anywhere else.
That throws cold water on any hope of Irvin popping up alongside Ricochet in AEW, at least until the clock runs out on her deal. And based on Otungas explanation, this isnt just a rumorits contract law 101.
Sean Ross Sapp of Fightful Select reported on Irvins situation during a Q&A, confirming she signed a new WWE deal in early 2024 with a pay raisebut at a cost. The new agreement included a two-year non-compete clause, which was part of the reason WWE increased her on-screen presence before her departure.
Sapp noted that WWEs goal was to create viral moments with Irvin by putting the camera on her more frequently, even though she wasnt interested in continuing that role. Despite WWE telling the public she left to pursue music, Sapp clarified that wasnt entirely accurate.
Irvin herself recently acknowledged shes halfway through her non-compete, posting on social media that she has one more year to go before she can make her next move. But thanks to Otungas legal breakdown, fans finally understand why WWE can still legally keep her on iceand why she probably wont be making any surprise appearances anytime soon.
Do you think WWEs long non-compete tactics are fair to talent like Samantha Irvin? Or is this just business as usual in wrestling contracts? Drop your thoughts in the comments and let us know what side youre on.
Please credit Ringside News if you use the above transcript in your publication.
