- 18,075
- 8,588
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2013
Thanks for the pics of the OGs it does look darker but do you think that could be due to aging at all?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
This guy with his "clown" shoes fixation....Lol don't even understand the gif reaction. If you want to spend $220+ to wear clown shoes, be my guest
Thanks for the pics of the OGs it does look darker but do you think that could be due to aging at all?
True can't put too much stock into these early pics. Once the NDC pics come out and people see them in person it'll get cleared upThe print base is supposed to be grey, whether in be dark similar to the aged OGs, or light like the 2001 and 2011. Its not supposed to be tannish. Hopefully its a "grey market" mistake of not knowing how to color their fakes properly.
Dude that pic is garbage. Looks like a boat just tipped over, these are my favorite colorway of J's ever but damn that OG pair looks bad. I grew up with 01's and wore them for 5 years almost every friday, I truly love Tbs. But that toebox looks terrible, not everything OG is better.exactly! THIS is how the medial side should look, NOT like the 2001s!
IDC about the paint job though, who cares.
Whoever saying 2001s over OGs have lost they damn minds and obviously never owned OGs. Your youth is showing and retros must be all u have to go on.
your youth is showing right now. whoever thinks 2001s are superior to OGs in ANY aspect, especially shape-wise, has obviously never owned OGs and only has the retros to go on for reference. that's the ONLY way your statement makes any sense. if u actually had OGs and still think 2001s were better then i just don't know what to say to you. the ONLY retros that have been on par with the OGs were the 1st retros (or re-issues, as some called them), which came out in 94-95 with the special commemorative shoe boxes (1s, 2s, 3s) and true blues obviously didn't retro til '01. no retros since have been on par, sorry. many may not be old enough to remember.
I don't get why its so hard to make a 1:1 of the Og's same shape and cut, I know materials wise that's impossible but at least the 94-99 retros.
I don't get why its so hard to make a 1:1 of the Og's same shape and cut, I know materials wise that's impossible but at least the 94-99 retros.
It's not , they simply choose not to...so they can re-retro them over and over
Pretty much, it's a matter of $$$. Are they going to spend the additional costs to revamp the molds, templates, etc. or use the same molds they've been using for a while and still sell them out?It's not , they simply choose not to...so they can re-retro them over and over
Exactly.
Just look around this forum and see how many people are willing to settle for whatever JB gives them, they even complain about "complainers" who aren't willing to settle like they are.
niketalk is built on complainers from day 1 lol
I don't see how people complaining about spending $190+ on a pair of sneakers and not being satisfied with them and voicing their opinion of a forum for sneakers and be classified as a complainer.
doesnt matter.. cant convince everyone to be on the same page. some understand while some do notI don't see how people complaining about spending $190+ on a pair of sneakers and not being satisfied with them and voicing their opinion of a forum for sneakers and be classified as a complainer.
"the red liner makes this release a no go"
but the original had it
"oh, really...are you sure, cause i'm not"
yes
"well it still sucks"
If you want to complain about something you should be complaining about how on the OG the red didn't show on foot because the liner didn't wrap over back then. Now that they wrap it over you can see it and it becomes a problem.