- Jan 27, 2013
- 14,804
- 26,208
I feel like he'll stick with the Kobe-inspired 36s
Air Jordan XXXVII (37) first look…
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by AIR J XIII,
- Start date
- Sep 5, 2000
- 3,690
- 7,743
Agreed. He’s a superstitious dude. He will stick to what is working for him, and right now, it appears to be these. I remember him switching to the Zoo 34s a lot, even when the 35s were out.
- Jun 23, 2021
- 513
- 966
Those are nice. Wonder if the outsole glowsI don’t know why but they were fire
- Aug 13, 2000
- 1,659
- 3,943
Would be fitting for him to stick with the 36.
Perhaps a white alternate as a play on the Big Stages so hell have a Home and Away pair.
- Sep 7, 2019
- 120
- 392
Wait… these are actually the 37??? I thought these were just a concept someone made.
Last edited:
- Mar 16, 2020
- 3,442
- 6,668
Yes-terday
- Apr 15, 2010
- 4,973
- 5,557
I could go without the see through mesh
KanyIZZY
formerly j o 19
- Oct 1, 2004
- 18,681
- 49,703
Joints look bad so far. Not feeling the on foot blurry pic shots.
- Jan 2, 2003
- 661
- 1,057
Those were Bradley Beal's, he loves to nod that scripture. The sig strategy is confusing. It's obviously not about making money. They're paying Melo millions to market PEs and CP still gets his wearing a 4yr old shoe.
- Jan 2, 2003
- 661
- 1,057
Not always the case, there's several duds that came after better predecessors and several older models that out-perform many newer ones.
- Aug 13, 2000
- 1,659
- 3,943
- Jan 2, 2014
- 4,855
- 7,400
“Intended to be an upgrade”.
Not just intended but designed to get better and better year after year.
Unless you believe the goal was to make duds…
- May 11, 2012
- 4,736
- 5,777
So the 37s based on that pic have double stacked forefoot zoom AND a forefoot zoom strobel board? And the heel went from zoom in the 36s (strobel) to foam… interesting. I’m sure they’ll be great on court.
- Oct 3, 2019
- 1,098
- 1,698
Gotta say: if those really are the tech specs, I'm disappointed. Tried the GT Run, which has the same cushion setup in the forefoot, and was not impressed. Of course the heel foam can be a pleasant surprise, but after seeing the specs I'm gonna be out at least for now. If they end up being performance beats then I will tuck my tail between my legs and be on the line for these 
- Feb 23, 2006
- 11,763
- 5,897
Smh. Another foam that going to bottom out. They had a hit with the 36’s, why not build off of that. Hopefully these specs are wrong and we get something concrete soon.
- Aug 13, 2000
- 3,248
- 2,340
I'm waiting to see official pics and get official tech specs from JB. Who knows how real that pic and tech specs are.
- May 11, 2012
- 4,736
- 5,777
Might have to get a few 36 lows if we get that b.s. lol
- Jan 2, 2003
- 661
- 1,057
I know a little about this… they don’t always look to ‘improve’ because they don’t always feel the predecessor was a failure. They will say the predecessor gave them ‘what they wanted’ for that ‘specific cycle’. Unless feedback is overwhelmingly bad, they take a blank canvas approach, while incrementally tweaking the uppers and cushion set up. That’s why so many of their techs have come and go (traction patterns, shrouds, tech flex, IPS, changeable midsoles, APT, flight plate, fly woven/weave, fast fit, eclipse plate). Does the current Air Jordan outperform all of those previous iterations of tech? They’re not using that metric.
Last edited:
- Apr 5, 2008
- 39,589
- 80,199
- Aug 10, 2012
- 20,424
- 36,772
- May 12, 2003
- 4,961
- 8,578
Jordan used to average 35 in shoes that weighed 5lbs each. Y’all will be straight with a little foam in the heel.
- Jan 2, 2014
- 4,855
- 7,400
It’s not about a previous model being a failure. It’s about building a better and better shoe with each new model.
More cushion, different traction pattern, different materials for uppers to make the shoe lighter.
Each model is about progression.
To answer your question. The Air Jordan is Nike’s\Jordan’s flagship model, it’s intended to out perform every previous Jordan model.
The 2 was supposed to be better than the 1, the 4 better than the 3 etc…
If you didn’t know that I’m not sure what to tell ya.
- Feb 19, 2013
- 11,832
- 14,477
That’s why I still hoop in older models too. If it was good enough for me in the 90s it’s good enough for me now
- May 12, 2022
- 191
- 835
I know this is off topic but I wish jb would release these two aj2009 aka 24 sample
- Jan 2, 2003
- 661
- 1,057
Early on? Sure. But that’s not how the last 25 years went. I quote Howard White, I know him personally. The XV is a KNOWN dud- Tinker ADMITTED he failed that shoe. He was NOT building that shoe to improve on the XIVs. He also admitted similar with the 30. The 31 was one of the worse recent Jordan’s regarding traction. The fast fit 33 was an overall dud compared to predecessors. The 35s bulky eclipse plate was very a miss for many. I’m sorry if discussing these mishaps sacrilege the Air Jordan.It’s not about a previous model being a failure. It’s about building a better and better shoe with each new model.
More cushion, different traction pattern, different materials for uppers to make the shoe lighter.
Each model is about progression.
To answer your question. The Air Jordan is Nike’s\Jordan’s flagship model, it’s intended to out perform every previous Jordan model.
The 2 was supposed to be better than the 1, the 4 better than the 3 etc…
If you didn’t know that I’m not sure what to tell ya.
