- Jul 28, 2012
- 5,949
- 10,340
New.Pre owned or brand new
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
New.Pre owned or brand new
Not a single photo of SB4 shape, that’s why no one has “noticed”. No idea what you’re talking about. Come Feb the shape from the UA factory pairs will be different on the real pairs? That doesn’t make any senseLow Cut 3,s or 4,s wouldn't make any money in comparison to other Jordan lows. Because those two models are considerably already low in the eyes of alot of us. Lows in 1,s and 11,s are understandable, because those models are higher around the ankles. 3,s and 4,s would look hideous in low form. It wouldn't look good to me, because of how their built and designed. It's a good thing that ALOT of you all dont work for Nike/JB.
There would be few Gentry 2.0,s at those buildings right now. Case in point, we have people arguing and disliking the reimagined Bred 4,s, due to them having leather on them. All the while, nobody's noticing that they actually have the same shape as the SB4,s that were released. Yes the new pictures and videos are if fakes, but that's what we're getting in February.
Patent breds and suede royals are also trash. Nobody wants switched up materials. The only 2 good reimagined shoes were the thoughtfully aged looking ones.Material change is more common on the “reimagined” line than anything else. Jordan 3s were an anomoly. Patent breds, suede royals, and now these leather black cements. Maybe cuz white cement 3s last retroed in OG form so long ago Nike didn’t want to mess with it too much and incite a riot.
What does this even mean? You’re saying it’s less significant to change from leather to suede than durabuck to leather?And comparing the sacredness of materials the royals aren’t even in the discussion.
These could be an exact 1:1 with the OGs or ‘99s in terms of shape and I’m still not buying.
I’m saying the 1 has been done in thousands of ways. Jordan didn’t even wear the royals. He hit the shot in one of the most iconic shoes ever.What does this even mean? You’re saying it’s less significant to change from leather to suede than durabuck to leather?
Yeah. Sorry, forgot this wasn’t actually the thread for the reimagined IVs lolYou’re talking about the 4s with the leather? Yeah after seeing all the pics the shiny leather looks so bad it’s crazy. I just want them to nail ONE og 4 and I’ll be happy. Because they haven’t done it since the 99s
The suede royals are far from trash though. So much they got right on them. And comparing the sacredness of materials the royals aren’t even in the discussion.
Can’t really get it wrong when you’re not trying to get it rightThey got the most important thing wrong though
I agree.If we’re being real, those royals would be going for way over retail now if they had just copy/pasted the reimagined chi aesthetic. The suede obviously doesn’t resonate with consumers in the same way.
Nah I think royals just arent as popular as Chis and the shoe market is down in general.