Kobe II in retrospect

Personally, I don't care about the differences between the cultures of Nike and Adidas, as I know the result very well. I have had friends murdered due to this "culture", you tout. I have seen the pretense that has developed due to Nike not addressing the issue of kids beating and harming, then putting each other down over shoes.

Shoes.

Now, I am not hating on business. I have two of my own that do very well. But I am big on ethics and then being responsible, so not to insult you but SCREW Nike culture. If this culture cultivates someone like Men of Oregon, then it is really nothing to brag about. If that culture is what put the House of Hoops in a Harlem, a Harlem that is fighting against regentrification, then screw Nike culture even deeper.
wow...just WOW...never mind the socio-economic conditions that created the climate in which you had people getting hurt over shoes, blame it allone 1 corporate entity. also forget that harlem/nyc is looked at a a mecca of sorts for basketball, nah obviously nike's only reasoning to put up astorefront there is to take advantage of the community's blighted people...not sure what point your are trying to make? moreover it has nothing to do withcorporate culture...

when it comes to comfort, fit, performance, & style (obviously), these are all very much subjective things, this much we all are (should be) aware of...soi would not take anyone's word about those things as anything other than their OPINION, however i do respect those opinions, even those seemingly blindedby bias...

I still don't get how the Kobe II is a better or worse shoe than the GIL OR the BB in anyone's eyes that isn't a Shoe Reviewer. I would find it very difficult to believe a person who seeks a shoe to fit their needs can try on several shoes meant for a different type of player and assess one is better than the other UNLESS they are an Industry shoe reveiwer.
i had to re-read that a couple times to make sure that is what i read. are you really saying that only an "industry shoe reviewer" isable to qualified to discern what makes a good shoe for someone?

As I stated, Adidas isn't perfect, but I am sure that can go to the head of Adidas Basketball, then he would LISTEN to what it is that I have to say, without having a bunch of sycophants screaming bullspit about being a "hater", in the background.

I'd like that accessability, I'd like that honesty and I'd LOVE the humility. This is SMART business.

It's not like Nike, who are dressed in arrogance. Proof, the bigot Men of Oregon.
nike is an arrogant company, no doubt about that, it is what one of the aspects of the company that made it what it is; but what makes you thinkadidas isn't? what makes you think that head of nike basketball would not want to listen to what you have to say about their products? i am sure therewould be "a bunch of sycophants screaming bullspit about being a "hater", in the background." if we were talking about football (the otherfootball) "boots" where adidas is the top dog.

i can't really say if the azk2 was a success or not, because i do not know what the barometer of success is for nike or to any one else for that matter. ican tell you this, a couple years ago nike gave this kobe guy a sneaker deal, despite the prevailing point-of-view was that he was no longer marketable, andwhile his shoes do not seem to be making a big splash on the consumer circuit, hoopers & nike faithful alike seem to hold his shoes in high regards, we doknow there will be another nike x kobe collabo, which however hideous people are actually throwing the money down to buy based on the previous performance ofthe kobe line alone, everything else is academic...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by RockDeep



BUT.. I would take the word of Professor K, over EVEN words from me put on a board as he reviewed MANY shoes from MANY brands. The Typical consumer does NOT do this. buy several shoes from several Brands.. there fore Jack J telling me something is far superior to something else is VERY bias compared to what a Shoe reviewer with no affiliation or loyalty to a brand would have.


See Jack J. unlike MANY who think they can make things better with a situation, I realize I have to understand how the processes work as well as how decision were made before. Are all decisions made by Nike made for sustainment and continuous marketing of a Product? Of course not. Sometimes you need the Quick hitter success.


Just like Adidas putting out One shoe to be good enough for FIVE star players. Negative. Each player has their own style and game, which compels one to allow each players game to speak thru their shoe on the court.


I don't agree that Lebron Should be strictly a Zoom Air player.. as one of my collegues NOT in Nike Basketball said, he should be a FORCE player. If Lebron likes Zoom... Combine Force with Zoom to create a new Product which takes the public by surprise and ...I;ve said too much...

But you get the gist.. I don't want to ramble, but I wanted to clarify...

Click to expand...

Since I actually play ball, at a HIGH level, along with those who I respect the heck out of on court, we KNOW that there is no such thing as a "guard shoe". Adidas is right on point with what they are doing. Back in the day everyone wore the same thing. Many College teams rock one shoe. Today, the whole Ohio State crew is wearing the LBJ5's , as last year they all wore that boot of a 4, which shows that you don't know what you are talking about in regard to a players needs The only difference between College and the Pros is MONEY. In the pros you can market the individual, it's not that way in College.

What Adidas is doing is bringing back the TEAM concept. WE not ME. This is something that Nike knows nothing about, as their roster is filled with a bunch of spoiled punks, who are nothing but about themselves. See KOBE, see VICK. Nike markets the individual, I say you keep on doing it, because I love seeing Nike fail at this.

The sig shoe is done
i understand what you are saying with that, and would agree to an extent...just like one who purchases a high performance sports car for a dailydriver, it does not make it any less of a sports car. similarly, while the "position shoe" may not be totally exclusive or even a proper category,that does not really change the fact that certain shoes are designed with specific needs/purposes in mind. certainly a shaq is going to have different needsfrom his steps than ai, no question (yes pun) about that.

we not me? you are not serious...while i do not think it is a bad ad campaign or message to promote,
1 it does not strike me as being different markedly from nike's flight/force squad(s)
2 it almost has to be that way, adidas probably does not want to compete on that level in hoops, a different approach is/was warranted

honestly no one really cares all that much about taglines or slogans, product is what it is about at the end of the day. and when it comes to basketball, nikehas done the better job communicating that to consumers. as absurd the notion that wearing a logo will instantly make one a better athlete is, that willalways resonate with people. "it takse five" does not say anything about the product nor have anything to do with the product; it is philosophy.

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by JDRone


My thoughts:

-These shoes weren't marketed right. Nike certainly took a hefty risk in releasing these all at the same time. This community can argue for days about whether Kobe is marketable, how successful his commercial would be, but these shoes should've been released at different points of the year-similar to the Lebron line. The game shoe releases in the Fall for team ballplayers, the Soldier is released in the summer for Blacktop/AAU squads, and that ST joint was marketed strictly as a casual offering. I think something like: Kobe 'Ultimates' released in the Fall, Strengths released in the summer, and maybe the Lites released as a limited playoff release would've worked best. That way, the uneducated customer does not feel inundated with Kobe from every angle.
-Performance wise, these are a mixed bag. To me it's tough to assert that this shoe was the 'best on the market' in 2007 because of the cosmetic issues some wearers experienced. Many complained that the strap didn't say in-place during play. Then of course, you have the Achilles issue. For many, wearing thicker, heavier, or longer socks didn't remedy the issue of sometimes excruciating pain. I have no clue as to what significance that piece played towards the overall design, but Nike could've easily reduced weight and greatly increased comfort by using a Lycra based Achilles Pad. The Zoom Free offered an incredibly sensory ride underfoot almost out the box, but I wish the Free portion of the outsole was more durable. The Strength should've implemented some mesh overlays or mesh inlays to cope with almost no breathability. Certainly an interesting concept, and I hope Nike can continue to bring it along.
-Rock, can you touch on the "I don't trust my feet in anything else" stance?

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by tokes99

Since I actually play ball, at a HIGH level, along with those who I respect the heck out of on court, we KNOW that there is no such thing as a "guard shoe". Adidas is right on point with what they are doing. Back in the day everyone wore the same thing. Many College teams rock one shoe. Today, the whole Ohio State crew is wearing the LBJ5's , as last year they all wore that boot of a 4, which shows that you don't know what you are talking about in regard to a players needs The only difference between College and the Pros is MONEY. In the pros you can market the individual, it's not that way in College.

What Adidas is doing is bringing back the TEAM concept. WE not ME. This is something that Nike knows nothing about, as their roster is filled with a bunch of spoiled punks, who are nothing but about themselves. See KOBE, see VICK. Nike markets the individual, I say you keep on doing it, because I love seeing Nike fail at this.

The sig shoe is done

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Mr Deep doesn't realize how contradictory his statements are, in regard to his loyalties. "I dont trust my feet in anything else", proves his tilt toward a company that makes more faulty product, just by the sheer volume they produce.
you are arguing semantics there...but i digress.

i do not find rock's "loyalty" to the brand an indictment of his judgment or flawed allegiance, it is the reason brands exist...it is quiterational; we all have or know people that "only buy american" or only buy certain manufacturers elctronics. all it says is that a brand has held upto its part of the buyer-consumer contract to that particular customer...

Points taken, then understood. I don't disagree about the making of different shoes for different people either. I am just saying, there is no such thing as the proverbial "guard" shoe. You wear what is comfortable to you. In college, you wear what the team gives you.

Nike created that term, when all that is needed to play ball is a good supportive shoe. They, Nike, made a cheaper product then called it "flight", versus the more substantial and solidly built "force" shoes. It's was hinted that if you were a 'high flyer' you may want to wear the lighter shoe. I remember Gerald Wilkins being a part of these ads very well, as guards and small forwards were featured in these ads.

It was hype, something that has stuck around, unfortunately, as Doctor J, Magic Johnson, then Moses while he was in Houston, wore the same Converse shoe. Greg Oden and the point Guard Connely from Ohio State wore the same shoe last year, while people in all positions that are under Nike, are wearing Zoom BB's.

So is there something wrong with Adidas doing it?

I'll tell you what's wrong, Nike thinking that Kobe can push 3 shoes, and now this 'thing' called the III.
no sir, there is no problem with adidas doing it, my contention is they way they are doing it does not tell me anything about their product. while nike's delineation of shoes into flight & force (uptempo?) may be artificial, it creates an easily understandable distinction which gives itsconsumers information about their product. fact is that, yes a general basketball shoe will suffice for the vast majority of people that play ball, but themarket demands choice, they want more segmentation. the 5'8" guy with bad knees wants more cushioning, the 6'9" cat the handles the ball& runs the court wants kicks that are lightweight, the other wants grip and stability. and i suspect that most do believe that there is some exclusivityto those wants/needs, meaning they know and understand there may be some compromise involved with them. so if you are one of those guys don't you wantthat dichotomy in the shoe market? the "guard's shoe" may well be a marketing term, however it gives people a lil' more information to makethe choice with...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Look, you say that there is a need for shoes by position, correct?
Jack: He said that it would be forward thinking to create shoes that would best suit the body type and/or playing style of each particularposition. To disagree with this is to ignore modern technology. Yes, in the earlier days of the game, everyone wore the same thing. They had no choice--guesswhat--we do nowadays. Why not take advantage of Zoom Air if you like a responsive shoe or Max Air if you want an extra supportive feel, etc, if it makes youmove a fraction quicker than your defender or jump just a little bit higher than the guy trying to stop you?

You say you play high level basketball. I don't know how high level that is (feel free to tell) but the higher the level of play, the more you run and jumpand cut. THUS, the better shoes you need and the more personalized fit and feel so you don't destroy your feet. Really. I've destroyed my feet in thewrong shoes. Won't do that again. But how can you say that all the adidas players wear the same shoe? Yeah, they wear the same model. I guarantee they allhave their own insoles, orthotics, or whatever else they need to modify that shoe to allow them to play a full game of NBA-level basketball for 82 nights in afew month span.

Don't twist words. That's all you've done; are you the thickest person on the planet? Rock is on point; your irrational crap is not winning anybattles.

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by Mister Jack Johnson

Look Rock, do you. There is the truth, there there is the corporate version of the truth. I've always found it interesting when the Wagons begin circling.

Look, you say that there is a need for shoes by position, correct?

So how can the ZKII be the best of the lot?

It's a "guard shoe", correct?

It's not for all positions, and last I looked, full court basketball was played with FIVE.

Click to expand...