Oh Brother: My Problem With The "Brother Vs. Brother" Wrestling Feud

So let me see if I get this right. Matt Hardy spent months making life a living hell for his brother and now seemingly out of nowhere he does a 180 and comes to save his brother from being assaulted by CM Punk and the Hart Dynasty.

To quote a certain masked superhero; "What's up with that!"

This article is not about what direction I think the WWE creative staff is taking with Matt -- this has already been addressed by both Cory Birch and Joe Burgett in two very good and interesting articles.

My gripe is with the WWE's fascination with the Brother vs. Brother feud as a whole.

I feel it's the same song and dance time after time. Brothers (whether real or just storyline) compete as a tag team for a time, most likely winning the tag team titles at some point.

Everything goes well for a while, until one brother gets more love from the crowd or finds success in the singles division. That creates jealousy within the team, thus causing friction between the brothers until it boils over and the two settle it one on one.

We first saw this with Owen and Bret Hart. Owen was becoming jealous of Bret's success and it eventually led to two memorable matches at Wrestlemania X and Summerslam.

This feud was original at the time because the Harts were legitimate brothers and the feud was set around the WWF championship. Over time, though, the act has gotten rather stale.

Both Edge and Christian and the Hardys both split up at one time due to a jealous brother. In fact, jealousy has done the Hardys in TWICE -- how's that for extreme? I understand that it was time for all four to pursue singles careers, but we don't need to keep following the exact same storyline every time.

Another problem with the brother vs. brother concept is how quickly it seems they get over the feud. The Undertaker and Kane have fought and teamed together more times than I can count. The Hardys made nice, won tag team gold again, and then eventually went at it again. Now they might be on the same page again! (For the record I do think Matt will turn on Jeff at Summerslam and continue this lackluster feud)

Personally, I feel that if a team breaks up on bad terms they should NOT tag as a team again, especially if they’re brothers. It would add more legitimacy to the feud if they never work together again.

One final problem I have with the brother vs. brother concept is that I think it's a cop out on the part of the writers to create a storyline for the two wrestlers. "Hey these guys are getting stale as a team. I know! Let's split them up and have them feud for a few months. Brilliant!"

This recently happened with the Colons, who I enjoyed seeing as a tag team. They broke up due to Carlito becoming frustrated with Primo and have been going at it for about two months. Thankfully it appears that the WWE is moving beyond that now as it seems Carlito is going to make a run at the US Title.

If the WWE is going to continue feeding us feuding brothers, then I want something new and refreshing; not the same recycled act we’ve seen time and time again.