Ryan Faulconer Posted December 21, 2013 Report Share Posted December 21, 2013 I thought this would be a good topic for discussion. With WWE's ridiculous number of multi-generational stars this is probably a tougher debate than it was ten or fifteen years ago. I'm not sure how many members a family needs to have in order to be the true first family of wrestling. There are a number of families that only go as far as parent/offspring (you gotta keep em separated???) but that might be enough for some fans. The Hart Family seems to have been taken down a few pegs over the last decade. Bret/Owen/Davey/TJ/Dynamite/Teddy/Anvil/Natalya has a good top three with number four being wildly bipolar as far as an online consensus goes. Is there another to challenge the Samoans or the Brazos? The Von Erichs are definitely a good kayfabe choice but I'm not sure how well they stack up after Kerry and Kevin. I guess they fall into the Hart family category with time not being so kind when defining the "first family" of wrestling. The Rhodes family probably deserves a mention although they seem to only run three deep. Maybe the Windhams or Armstrongs or Fullers fall into the discussion. Then there is the Piratas and Parkas. I'd also pick the Hamadas and a lot of other lucha families like Negro Navarro's...and we could probably have a good discussion just rattling off lucha familias. Now that I think about it I'm probably in over my head on this one. I feel like I'm missing out on some obvious examples. The board can probably some fun with this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.