rbk93
Supporter
- Jun 29, 2016
- 14,289
- 13,637
The OG 3s just look sloppily made when compared to the newer retros. I'm not 100% if the bottom picture is the 2001 release, but I'll definitely take those for sure.
Nike Air Jordan Retro 3 OG “Fire Red” 2022
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by Jordanbball,
- Start date
The OG 3s just look sloppily made when compared to the newer retros. I'm not 100% if the bottom picture is the 2001 release, but I'll definitely take those for sure.
- Feb 21, 2019
- 2,343
- 3,155
You can't be serious. They took this sleek design and made it look like a pair of weird clunky boots.
The OG 3s just look sloppily made when compared to the newer retros. I'm not 100% if the bottom picture is the 2001 release, but I'll definitely take those for sure.
The bottom picture looks like a pair of Thom McAn's in comparison.
- Dec 7, 2018
- 2,267
- 5,926
Og’s are beautiful.
- Mar 29, 2001
- 22,398
- 71,021
Called that man Pippen 
- Oct 10, 2019
- 1,468
- 4,064
man those 88s are so fire 
- Jan 25, 2016
- 1,320
- 1,663
Honestly even what was released in 94 and 01 was no where close to the OG. The OG Grey on the Tongue matched the grey on the cement print. But for some reason they went to Grey cement and then eventually beige. Just don't understand, they have the OG shoes just make them the exact same way. Tinker is still alive he created the shoe. Why change it? They did it initially for the black cement IV in 1999. A almost perfect one to one copy of the OG. But then for the White Cement iv they changed it up a little with the cement print. Just don't understand when they have the height of the OG shoe, so the retro should be the same height. The 3/4 height for the 3 and 4 is what made the shape work. They were perfect. The thin EP on the front is what made the shoe look good. They have tried to get it better but why not just make it like the original. Just doesn't make sense. Its not like the OG was made over 200 years ago. There is still Deadstock pairs of the OG's just take them and measure them out and make the show like it was intended. Charge a premium, I don't care I just want the shoe like it was when I had them in 88, 89, and 90
- Sep 5, 2000
- 3,701
- 7,815
Lol. I’m not gonna trip about the shape of a shoe unless I owned the OG pair. Probably less than 5% of people on this board who can make that claim. ****, some people whining about the shape probably weren’t even born when the 3s first dropped.
- Oct 24, 2010
- 94,437
- 33,494
hope white cements on are the way soon man
- Sep 17, 2016
- 2,797
- 4,903
that's it for me after those come back. 3-4 pairs of those and walk away from the chase
- Jul 14, 2003
- 7,851
- 4,891
Mike's game-issued were an extreme example here but this shows the "evolution" of the 3 from Jordan Brand.
Either way, everybody please don't let this foolishness trick you into thinking this was calculated for the newer market and is a better version.
Either way, everybody please don't let this foolishness trick you into thinking this was calculated for the newer market and is a better version.
- Dec 8, 2004
- 835
- 1,687
Seeing what they did with the Air Max 90’s in 2020, it’s possible. Nike went all in on those. The attention to detail is something I haven’t seen since the late 90’s. It’s too much work for them to tear down the 3’s and 4’s and start over. They rather tweak them than to do a complete recraft.
- Jan 30, 2010
- 1,514
- 1,412
Mike's game-issued were an extreme example here but this shows the "evolution" of the 3 from Jordan Brand.
Either way, everybody please don't let this foolishness trick you into thinking this was calculated for the newer market and is a better version.
- Jul 14, 2003
- 7,851
- 4,891
Release date August 6
- Mar 18, 2014
- 334
- 377
I was there in 88
rainking
Supporter
- Aug 12, 2016
- 8,311
- 18,153
The reason we "trip" about it isn't just because we were there originally. It's because the shoe looked about 10x better. It was sleek. It was wearable with anything. The colors were perfect. It looked like a fashion sneaker (before there even were fashion sneakers) as much as it looked like an on-court shoe. Basically it was a completely different shoe than so many of the retros have been. That's why I love the AMMs so much: the look and feel of them is the closest we've seen.
- Mar 10, 2003
- 1,024
- 475
Treating myself to these for my birthday.
KanyIZZY
formerly j o 19
- Oct 1, 2004
- 18,692
- 49,780
Mike's game-issued were an extreme example here but this shows the "evolution" of the 3 from Jordan Brand.
Either way, everybody please don't let this foolishness trick you into thinking this was calculated for the newer market and is a better version.
Why does the sock liner on that OG pair look white.. gotta be a PS error.
- Jan 25, 2016
- 1,320
- 1,663
Exactly Just go all in.
Same!!!! Was 14 and the biggest MJ fan in the world. My room was nothing but MJ posters.I was there in 88
rbk93
Supporter
- Jun 29, 2016
- 14,289
- 13,637
The top picture definitely has to be stuffed with something.Mike's game-issued were an extreme example here but this shows the "evolution" of the 3 from Jordan Brand.
Either way, everybody please don't let this foolishness trick you into thinking this was calculated for the newer market and is a better version.
Most pictures I've seen of the OG 3s look worse than that.
- Oct 6, 2016
- 10,650
- 23,660
- Feb 23, 2014
- 3,090
- 5,884
I completely understand what you are saying. The OG don’t have a natural foot shape, and I’m sure are very uncomfortable. Improvements were made, whether we like them or not. I’d rather have the newer shape, but with that slimmed down elephant print.
The OG 3s just look sloppily made when compared to the newer retros. I'm not 100% if the bottom picture is the 2001 release, but I'll definitely take those for sure.
- Sep 5, 2000
- 3,701
- 7,815
Well, props to you if it means that much to you and you’re willing to skip out on this pair. I didn’t like Jordans until the fire red 4s dropped, and I did not even care when the first retro came out with the Jumpman on the back and the quality was bad. I just wanted a pair, since my parents couldn’t afford to get me a pair in 1989. Beat 2 pairs of the 2006s, missed out on the 2012, and was lucky enough to get the latest retro with the Nike Air in the back. I wear my joints, and the reason I won’t fret about the shape of a toe box is that it all looks the same to me when they’re on my feet.
Tomorrow isn’t promised. You can keep on hoping that one day, Nike/JB will get it exactly like the originals. Me personally, I’m not trying to wait 15-20, 30 years. Lol
rainking
Supporter
- Aug 12, 2016
- 8,311
- 18,153
I’ll likely buy these because they finally have improved the shape.
III the way it should be is my favorite Jordan along with the XI. But I didn’t buy a single pair between 2003 and the AMMs.
- Feb 21, 2019
- 2,343
- 3,155
Nobody's been in here insulting anyone or talking down to them. I 100% can't stand that kind of thing in here. That's not really happening so I don't really know what you're getting at.
Especially since you don't want to read everyone else talk about the shoes but you just wrote all of that.
