Nike your creative genius is not showing.

Originally Posted by peteyk 420

if the 5s are good enough for Kobe and Hyper Fuse/Dunk are good enough for the majority of the L it does make you think though. Now I know they wear custom orthotics but other then that I'm pretty sure they're the same quality as the ones in Footlocker.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question.  How many games in a row has Kobe Bryant worn the same shoe? It is a plastic shoe, so the costs of producing that shoe is low, thus being able to create throwaways for those who need bulk, such as Kobe Bryant and others who play in the NBA, correct? There are pics in the review forum of the Carbon fiber cracking after a few wears in the Kobe V. Do you mean to tell me that Kobe and others in the League would not have access to more shoes, for free mind you, if this does occur?
  
 
Originally Posted by peteyk 420

if the 5s are good enough for Kobe and Hyper Fuse/Dunk are good enough for the majority of the L it does make you think though. Now I know they wear custom orthotics but other then that I'm pretty sure they're the same quality as the ones in Footlocker.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question.  How many games in a row has Kobe Bryant worn the same shoe? It is a plastic shoe, so the costs of producing that shoe is low, thus being able to create throwaways for those who need bulk, such as Kobe Bryant and others who play in the NBA, correct? There are pics in the review forum of the Carbon fiber cracking after a few wears in the Kobe V. Do you mean to tell me that Kobe and others in the League would not have access to more shoes, for free mind you, if this does occur?
  
 
Originally Posted by lmns2

wally were you referring to the zoom tennis trainer?
Click to expand...
I was more so referring to the 2004-05 zoom trainer 1:
http://krysanthemum.com/nikelab/usa/episode_3/index.html?loc=restoration
http://www.freshnessmag.com/content/features/files/0904/rebirth/index005.php
Everything about that shoe was just so RIGHT. that's what got me interested in cross trainers. It holds such a special place for me that pretty much every other release out there falls short. I guess expectations are raised to the highest level.

I feel bad for the kids these days who look up to retro jordans. They dont know quality if it struck them in the face. (word to the ISS retro vs. OG thread... "Retros have technological advancements over OGs... how about NO?").

The 2008 tennis trainers were $30 dollars less on the MSRP (80 vs 110). They featured hardier synthetic leathers but still had the cushioning system that makes the zoom trainer great. It was a true lower tiered shoe from the original, and the price dictated that perfectly. Today's "top of the line" shoes are nothing more than middle tier products.

Nat Turner, I think I am so selective because of Nike's poor overall selection. So you may be right all together. Out of the few dozen shoes I own, there are a few core models, I dont only own one or a duplicate of, but into the 3s, 4s, and beyond. Once you find that shoe, I am done looking. I have been let down too many times to experiment with other nike shoes and the so called technological advances. Call me old fashion on that front. I'm just not that typical consumer.
 
Originally Posted by lmns2

wally were you referring to the zoom tennis trainer?
Click to expand...
I was more so referring to the 2004-05 zoom trainer 1:
http://krysanthemum.com/nikelab/usa/episode_3/index.html?loc=restoration
http://www.freshnessmag.com/content/features/files/0904/rebirth/index005.php
Everything about that shoe was just so RIGHT. that's what got me interested in cross trainers. It holds such a special place for me that pretty much every other release out there falls short. I guess expectations are raised to the highest level.

I feel bad for the kids these days who look up to retro jordans. They dont know quality if it struck them in the face. (word to the ISS retro vs. OG thread... "Retros have technological advancements over OGs... how about NO?").

The 2008 tennis trainers were $30 dollars less on the MSRP (80 vs 110). They featured hardier synthetic leathers but still had the cushioning system that makes the zoom trainer great. It was a true lower tiered shoe from the original, and the price dictated that perfectly. Today's "top of the line" shoes are nothing more than middle tier products.

Nat Turner, I think I am so selective because of Nike's poor overall selection. So you may be right all together. Out of the few dozen shoes I own, there are a few core models, I dont only own one or a duplicate of, but into the 3s, 4s, and beyond. Once you find that shoe, I am done looking. I have been let down too many times to experiment with other nike shoes and the so called technological advances. Call me old fashion on that front. I'm just not that typical consumer.
 
This kind of thing NEEDS to be talked about.

Nike Co. needs to know that they can't get away with this crap just because they're industry leaders...

I hope it all catches up with them and someone puts a fire underneath the company as a whole, and not just the running division.
 
This kind of thing NEEDS to be talked about.

Nike Co. needs to know that they can't get away with this crap just because they're industry leaders...

I hope it all catches up with them and someone puts a fire underneath the company as a whole, and not just the running division.
 
I feel bad for the kids these days who look up to retro jordans. They dont know quality if it struck them in the face. (word to the ISS retro vs. OG thread... "Retros have technological advancements over OGs... how about NO?").



Agreed. I get into debates all the time about how the OG XII's were far superior than both retro's in regard to quality.


Nat Turner, I think I am so selective because of Nike's poor overall selection. So you may be right all together


It is cost effective for Nike to make shoes tha they know will wind up in their outlets. There, they can sell the shoes for the price that they want to. Even if they are sold for 19.99 at a Nike outlet, they make money by cutting out the middle man. This is also the reason for the HOH style running shops.


 Out of the few dozen shoes I own, there are a few core models, I dont only own one or a duplicate of, but into the 3s, 4s, and beyond. Once you find that shoe, I am done looking.
Same here. However, my choice these days have been Adidas over Nike. The shoes look good and they are durable. I can even put'em in the washing machine and they come out fresh and still together. I could not do that with a Nike shoe, as something would go very wrong. I have a steady rotation of kicks to ball in that fit me well. Every once and a while I will try something new by Nike, but that has only sent me running back to what I've been balling in before. Let me say this, there are some nike shoes that I'd love to have again, but I am not willing to pay reseller prices, for what are actually very good shoes by Nike.

I have been let down too many times to experiment with other nike shoes and the so called technological advances. Call me old fashion on that front. I'm just not that typical consumer. 
Ditto, I am feeling the hell out of that.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I feel bad for the kids these days who look up to retro jordans. They dont know quality if it struck them in the face. (word to the ISS retro vs. OG thread... "Retros have technological advancements over OGs... how about NO?").



Agreed. I get into debates all the time about how the OG XII's were far superior than both retro's in regard to quality.


Nat Turner, I think I am so selective because of Nike's poor overall selection. So you may be right all together


It is cost effective for Nike to make shoes tha they know will wind up in their outlets. There, they can sell the shoes for the price that they want to. Even if they are sold for 19.99 at a Nike outlet, they make money by cutting out the middle man. This is also the reason for the HOH style running shops.


 Out of the few dozen shoes I own, there are a few core models, I dont only own one or a duplicate of, but into the 3s, 4s, and beyond. Once you find that shoe, I am done looking.
Same here. However, my choice these days have been Adidas over Nike. The shoes look good and they are durable. I can even put'em in the washing machine and they come out fresh and still together. I could not do that with a Nike shoe, as something would go very wrong. I have a steady rotation of kicks to ball in that fit me well. Every once and a while I will try something new by Nike, but that has only sent me running back to what I've been balling in before. Let me say this, there are some nike shoes that I'd love to have again, but I am not willing to pay reseller prices, for what are actually very good shoes by Nike.

I have been let down too many times to experiment with other nike shoes and the so called technological advances. Call me old fashion on that front. I'm just not that typical consumer. 
Ditto, I am feeling the hell out of that.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I would love to add something to what Wally and Nat are saying, but I just can't. They are saying it all and I just find my head nodding on every post by them. I am all for light kicks for ball, or running, but not at the expense of quality materials and durability on the cushioning and materials standpoint. I am older than most here (possibly all), so I can remember when the first Jordans released, and the leather quality on them was just ridiculous - creased when worn (contrary to most beliefs, this was not a sign of cheap but a sign the shoe was breaking in and becoming comfortable), thick, and call me old school, but I loved the old sueded cut edges instead of everything being smooth and rolled. I can remeber when the Alpha Project came out in 1998 and evryone either loved or hated ALL of the designs. They were so completely polarizing we started wondering if Nike lost their minds. Even though most think Shox as a technology sucked, have to admit, it was intriguing as a concept. Ultraflights, same thing. Shoe didn't work for me, though I still have a pair that I just bought off Ebay for looks, it caught the attention of everyone, and was possibly the beginning of the love here of plastic shoes. However, it was at least half real leather and featured ALOT of Zoom.

Someone back a page mentioned if Niketalk had been here in the 80's and 90's people would have still complained, and that is human nature to dwell on how good we had it. I remember Jordan IV's going back because the wings ripped. I took back 3 pair of Air Force V's because the toe flex point kept ripping out. Nike quality has always been iffy. Out of every shoe brand I have bought, it seems like Reebok has the best quality control, and that is funny. Maybe they sacrifice technology for quality? Or maybe by not focusing on so many different concepts they can perfect what they do.

And Nat, I agree, the XII's were tanks.
 
I would love to add something to what Wally and Nat are saying, but I just can't. They are saying it all and I just find my head nodding on every post by them. I am all for light kicks for ball, or running, but not at the expense of quality materials and durability on the cushioning and materials standpoint. I am older than most here (possibly all), so I can remember when the first Jordans released, and the leather quality on them was just ridiculous - creased when worn (contrary to most beliefs, this was not a sign of cheap but a sign the shoe was breaking in and becoming comfortable), thick, and call me old school, but I loved the old sueded cut edges instead of everything being smooth and rolled. I can remeber when the Alpha Project came out in 1998 and evryone either loved or hated ALL of the designs. They were so completely polarizing we started wondering if Nike lost their minds. Even though most think Shox as a technology sucked, have to admit, it was intriguing as a concept. Ultraflights, same thing. Shoe didn't work for me, though I still have a pair that I just bought off Ebay for looks, it caught the attention of everyone, and was possibly the beginning of the love here of plastic shoes. However, it was at least half real leather and featured ALOT of Zoom.

Someone back a page mentioned if Niketalk had been here in the 80's and 90's people would have still complained, and that is human nature to dwell on how good we had it. I remember Jordan IV's going back because the wings ripped. I took back 3 pair of Air Force V's because the toe flex point kept ripping out. Nike quality has always been iffy. Out of every shoe brand I have bought, it seems like Reebok has the best quality control, and that is funny. Maybe they sacrifice technology for quality? Or maybe by not focusing on so many different concepts they can perfect what they do.

And Nat, I agree, the XII's were tanks.
 
Originally Posted by duke4005

I would love to add something to what Wally and Nat are saying, but I just can't. They are saying it all and I just find my head nodding on every post by them. I am all for light kicks for ball, or running, but not at the expense of quality materials and durability on the cushioning and materials standpoint. I am older than most here (possibly all), so I can remember when the first Jordans released, and the leather quality on them was just ridiculous - creased when worn (contrary to most beliefs, this was not a sign of cheap but a sign the shoe was breaking in and becoming comfortable), thick, and call me old school, but I loved the old sueded cut edges instead of everything being smooth and rolled. I can remeber when the Alpha Project came out in 1998 and evryone either loved or hated ALL of the designs. They were so completely polarizing we started wondering if Nike lost their minds. Even though most think Shox as a technology sucked, have to admit, it was intriguing as a concept. Ultraflights, same thing. Shoe didn't work for me, though I still have a pair that I just bought off Ebay for looks, it caught the attention of everyone, and was possibly the beginning of the love here of plastic shoes. However, it was at least half real leather and featured ALOT of Zoom.

Someone back a page mentioned if Niketalk had been here in the 80's and 90's people would have still complained, and that is human nature to dwell on how good we had it. I remember Jordan IV's going back because the wings ripped. I took back 3 pair of Air Force V's because the toe flex point kept ripping out. Nike quality has always been iffy. Out of every shoe brand I have bought, it seems like Reebok has the best quality control, and that is funny. Maybe they sacrifice technology for quality? Or maybe by not focusing on so many different concepts they can perfect what they do.

And Nat, I agree, the XII's were tanks.
Click to expand...

join in....you know nike is watching....
laugh.gif
  
 
Originally Posted by duke4005

I would love to add something to what Wally and Nat are saying, but I just can't. They are saying it all and I just find my head nodding on every post by them. I am all for light kicks for ball, or running, but not at the expense of quality materials and durability on the cushioning and materials standpoint. I am older than most here (possibly all), so I can remember when the first Jordans released, and the leather quality on them was just ridiculous - creased when worn (contrary to most beliefs, this was not a sign of cheap but a sign the shoe was breaking in and becoming comfortable), thick, and call me old school, but I loved the old sueded cut edges instead of everything being smooth and rolled. I can remeber when the Alpha Project came out in 1998 and evryone either loved or hated ALL of the designs. They were so completely polarizing we started wondering if Nike lost their minds. Even though most think Shox as a technology sucked, have to admit, it was intriguing as a concept. Ultraflights, same thing. Shoe didn't work for me, though I still have a pair that I just bought off Ebay for looks, it caught the attention of everyone, and was possibly the beginning of the love here of plastic shoes. However, it was at least half real leather and featured ALOT of Zoom.

Someone back a page mentioned if Niketalk had been here in the 80's and 90's people would have still complained, and that is human nature to dwell on how good we had it. I remember Jordan IV's going back because the wings ripped. I took back 3 pair of Air Force V's because the toe flex point kept ripping out. Nike quality has always been iffy. Out of every shoe brand I have bought, it seems like Reebok has the best quality control, and that is funny. Maybe they sacrifice technology for quality? Or maybe by not focusing on so many different concepts they can perfect what they do.

And Nat, I agree, the XII's were tanks.
Click to expand...

join in....you know nike is watching....
laugh.gif
  
 
Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by peteyk 420

if the 5s are good enough for Kobe and Hyper Fuse/Dunk are good enough for the majority of the L it does make you think though. Now I know they wear custom orthotics but other then that I'm pretty sure they're the same quality as the ones in Footlocker.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question.  How many games in a row has Kobe Bryant worn the same shoe? It is a plastic shoe, so the costs of producing that shoe is low, thus being able to create throwaways for those who need bulk, such as Kobe Bryant and others who play in the NBA, correct? There are pics in the review forum of the Carbon fiber cracking after a few wears in the Kobe V. Do you mean to tell me that Kobe and others in the League would not have access to more shoes, for free mind you, if this does occur?
  
Click to expand...

right?? even the scrubs in the league signed to nike get something crazy like 32 pairs just for the 82 regular season games. so even the nobodies in the NBA only have to wear their shoes for 3 games tops. its also worth mentioning that the vast majority of players in the NBA are wearing extremely different shoes than what we buy off of the shleves. everything from the materials to extra cushioning and even altered eyelets specials lasts to ensure optimal performance. if we had access to what the guys in the "L" play in, these comments everyone is making wouldn't exist.
 
Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by peteyk 420

if the 5s are good enough for Kobe and Hyper Fuse/Dunk are good enough for the majority of the L it does make you think though. Now I know they wear custom orthotics but other then that I'm pretty sure they're the same quality as the ones in Footlocker.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question.  How many games in a row has Kobe Bryant worn the same shoe? It is a plastic shoe, so the costs of producing that shoe is low, thus being able to create throwaways for those who need bulk, such as Kobe Bryant and others who play in the NBA, correct? There are pics in the review forum of the Carbon fiber cracking after a few wears in the Kobe V. Do you mean to tell me that Kobe and others in the League would not have access to more shoes, for free mind you, if this does occur?
  
Click to expand...

right?? even the scrubs in the league signed to nike get something crazy like 32 pairs just for the 82 regular season games. so even the nobodies in the NBA only have to wear their shoes for 3 games tops. its also worth mentioning that the vast majority of players in the NBA are wearing extremely different shoes than what we buy off of the shleves. everything from the materials to extra cushioning and even altered eyelets specials lasts to ensure optimal performance. if we had access to what the guys in the "L" play in, these comments everyone is making wouldn't exist.
 
Originally Posted by mt3130

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by peteyk 420

if the 5s are good enough for Kobe and Hyper Fuse/Dunk are good enough for the majority of the L it does make you think though. Now I know they wear custom orthotics but other then that I'm pretty sure they're the same quality as the ones in Footlocker.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question.  How many games in a row has Kobe Bryant worn the same shoe? It is a plastic shoe, so the costs of producing that shoe is low, thus being able to create throwaways for those who need bulk, such as Kobe Bryant and others who play in the NBA, correct? There are pics in the review forum of the Carbon fiber cracking after a few wears in the Kobe V. Do you mean to tell me that Kobe and others in the League would not have access to more shoes, for free mind you, if this does occur?
  
Click to expand...

right?? even the scrubs in the league signed to nike get something crazy like 32 pairs just for the 82 regular season games. so even the nobodies in the NBA only have to wear their shoes for 3 games tops. its also worth mentioning that the vast majority of players in the NBA are wearing extremely different shoes than what we buy off of the shleves. everything from the materials to extra cushioning and even altered eyelets specials lasts to ensure optimal performance. if we had access to what the guys in the "L" play in, these comments everyone is making wouldn't exist.
Click to expand...

Some are, depending on what injuries or special needs they may be dealing with. For instance, if an orthotic is too big for a certain shoe, some will wear what amounts to a "shell" to play in, to help prevent the shoe from being too "tippy", rolling over too easily. This is one of Grant Hill's shoes for Adidas. Knowing that he has had multiple surgeries on his ankle, Grant didn't have, nor want, anything special in his shoes. He just wanted a good solid shoe, and adidas gave it to him. 
85c1626163d77d1e6f0aad3d49c0d19a8fbf8c05_r.jpg
f7d1666567de7a136590330faeae5a7aac109716_r.jpg

   The other is Jason Kidd's Jordan XIX SE's. They have the same set up as the GR's, with Kidd's sig being the only exception.

There are rumors of 'sheed having special cushioning in his AF1's as well, and that is not true. I also have his PE's which are size 13, small for a big man and there is no "Zoom air" in them at all.

However, the players do have access to multiple pairs of shoes. With Nike making shoes out of plastic these days, they can make as many as they want for the Nike endorsers, cheaply, then jacking up the prices on consumers in order to pay for the excess. This is why this sucks for the Nike customer. They get stiffed, having to buy another pair of shoes if they break down.

  

       
 
Originally Posted by mt3130

Originally Posted by Nat Turner

Originally Posted by peteyk 420

if the 5s are good enough for Kobe and Hyper Fuse/Dunk are good enough for the majority of the L it does make you think though. Now I know they wear custom orthotics but other then that I'm pretty sure they're the same quality as the ones in Footlocker.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question.  How many games in a row has Kobe Bryant worn the same shoe? It is a plastic shoe, so the costs of producing that shoe is low, thus being able to create throwaways for those who need bulk, such as Kobe Bryant and others who play in the NBA, correct? There are pics in the review forum of the Carbon fiber cracking after a few wears in the Kobe V. Do you mean to tell me that Kobe and others in the League would not have access to more shoes, for free mind you, if this does occur?
  
Click to expand...

right?? even the scrubs in the league signed to nike get something crazy like 32 pairs just for the 82 regular season games. so even the nobodies in the NBA only have to wear their shoes for 3 games tops. its also worth mentioning that the vast majority of players in the NBA are wearing extremely different shoes than what we buy off of the shleves. everything from the materials to extra cushioning and even altered eyelets specials lasts to ensure optimal performance. if we had access to what the guys in the "L" play in, these comments everyone is making wouldn't exist.
Click to expand...

Some are, depending on what injuries or special needs they may be dealing with. For instance, if an orthotic is too big for a certain shoe, some will wear what amounts to a "shell" to play in, to help prevent the shoe from being too "tippy", rolling over too easily. This is one of Grant Hill's shoes for Adidas. Knowing that he has had multiple surgeries on his ankle, Grant didn't have, nor want, anything special in his shoes. He just wanted a good solid shoe, and adidas gave it to him. 
85c1626163d77d1e6f0aad3d49c0d19a8fbf8c05_r.jpg
f7d1666567de7a136590330faeae5a7aac109716_r.jpg

   The other is Jason Kidd's Jordan XIX SE's. They have the same set up as the GR's, with Kidd's sig being the only exception.

There are rumors of 'sheed having special cushioning in his AF1's as well, and that is not true. I also have his PE's which are size 13, small for a big man and there is no "Zoom air" in them at all.

However, the players do have access to multiple pairs of shoes. With Nike making shoes out of plastic these days, they can make as many as they want for the Nike endorsers, cheaply, then jacking up the prices on consumers in order to pay for the excess. This is why this sucks for the Nike customer. They get stiffed, having to buy another pair of shoes if they break down.

  

       
 
" its also worth mentioning that the vast majority of players in the NBA are wearing extremely different shoes than what we buy off of the shleves."

Really?  I worked in footwear research and development with NIKE Basketball and Brand Jordan.  I also collected 150-200 pairs of NBA pro make-ups (player exclusives) in my size range of 15 -16.  The majority of the shoes were made for Tim Duncan, Scottie Pippen, Kevin Garnett, Michael Finley, David Robinson, Shariff Abdur-Rahim, and Vin Baker.  The only athlete I'm aware of who consistently wore altered shoes was Scottie Pippen - he preferred Zoom Air to Air Max. 

What is your source of information?  Who are these players, what models are they wearing, and what changes are being made to the shoes? 
 
" its also worth mentioning that the vast majority of players in the NBA are wearing extremely different shoes than what we buy off of the shleves."

Really?  I worked in footwear research and development with NIKE Basketball and Brand Jordan.  I also collected 150-200 pairs of NBA pro make-ups (player exclusives) in my size range of 15 -16.  The majority of the shoes were made for Tim Duncan, Scottie Pippen, Kevin Garnett, Michael Finley, David Robinson, Shariff Abdur-Rahim, and Vin Baker.  The only athlete I'm aware of who consistently wore altered shoes was Scottie Pippen - he preferred Zoom Air to Air Max. 

What is your source of information?  Who are these players, what models are they wearing, and what changes are being made to the shoes? 
 
Great conversation guys. Since I am one of the older guys on here I have been around long enough to notice the trend towards higher prices and less cushioning. Lunarglides are comfortable but I don't run in them. I actually run in free 5.0s which as we all know have no air but have found these work best for my feet and knees but I have several pairs I rotate and pairs I only use in races because they don't last. For basketball I love zoo
And have been disappointed in Nike continuing to raise prices and cut out.cushioning and people on here are just eating it up. My feet love zoom for bball and pretty much all my kicks I play in have either heel and forefoot zoom or full length zoom. I passes on hypejunk and rises because of the cushioning setup I can't believe people are so hyped up over the hyperfuse that just have forefoot zoom. I guess that's just today's generation. Kobes have a heel zoom unit and just that little metatarsal unit but cost over 100 bucks, and we had zoom tennis trainers for 85 with heel and forefoot and zoom bb 1 for 110 and bb2 for 100 with full length zoom I am just alot more selective now and will be getting out the game pretty soonTyping on my phone sorry for the spelling errors
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
nike trainer sc 1987-1992
Replies
3
Views
547
bknowbles
bknowbles
therealest1
Patta x Nike Air Huarache Plus
Replies
2
Views
820
modus47
modus47
B
Nike Air Cross Trainer II Low/Mid-High
Replies
2
Views
551
1978S
1978S
therealest1
Nike Air DT Max 96 (Deion Sanders)
Replies
17
Views
3K
therealest1
therealest1
dblplay1212
StockX scamming? How is this legal?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
aepps20
aepps20

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom