Me alongside with a few other are always the minority to argue shape. Shout out to the fellas who are quick with the John Madden pen diagrams
However on the Jordan 3, aside from the absence of the 3/4th heel on the OG and '94, the bolder darkened elephant print, elongated tab, and the print being higher on the heel and toe cap. The issue is the shoe slowly losing it's depth on the forefoot giving it a deflated shape. It's not the toe as you say. If there was more depth, the misconception of the toe looking bulky would be there. All these have just about the same toe.
'88
View media item 1932333'94
View media item 1932328'01
View media item 1932329'08
View media item 1932350'11
View media item 1932338
The CDP had horrible quality, but a way better shape than the '11. I wouldn't place all the blame on NTs favorite scapegoat Gentry. He's been gone, and mold problems are still an issue. I still don't see too big of an issue with the 3 as I do other models.
I don't know, the '11 pair has the best EPrint of all the retros it seems. The only flaw I can see is that they cut the heel print slope short on the side where it meets the midsole. It just shoots down at the tip where the OG keeps the angle until it hits midsole. The toe print doesn't look bad at all, nor does the shape, they just need to fix the curve. I guess the main problem with retros could be the sole itself.... And the ankle collar.Me alongside with a few other are always the minority to argue shape. Shout out to the fellas who are quick with the John Madden pen diagrams
However on the Jordan 3, aside from the absence of the 3/4th heel on the OG and '94, the bolder darkened elephant print, elongated tab, and the print being higher on the heel and toe cap. The issue is the shoe slowly losing it's depth on the forefoot giving it a deflated shape. It's not the toe as you say. If there was more depth, the misconception of the toe looking bulky would be there. All these have just about the same toe.
'88
'94
'01
'08
'11
The CDP had horrible quality, but a way better shape than the '11. I wouldn't place all the blame on NTs favorite scapegoat Gentry. He's been gone, and mold problems are still an issue. I still don't see too big of an issue with the 3 as I do other models.
The height of the upper is the main reason why I sold only the BC3 from 2011. Like you said other models have the same issue but the AJ4 is really irritating to me. If they made the tounge shorter to compensate the lower height of the shoe I'd be fine, but it's like they made the tounge longer than it was before. The 99's were perfect, 04'-06' was ok but from 08'-present they OD'd on the height of the tounge. Minus the 11LAB4; it's like they got the entire mold right on those which is part of the reason I like them so much.Me alongside with a few other are always the minority to argue shape. Shout out to the fellas who are quick with the John Madden pen diagrams
However on the Jordan 3, aside from the absence of the 3/4th heel on the OG and '94, the bolder darkened elephant print, elongated tab, and the print being higher on the heel and toe cap. The issue is the shoe slowly losing it's depth on the forefoot giving it a deflated shape. It's not the toe as you say. If there was more depth, the misconception of the toe looking bulky would be there. All these have just about the same toe.
'88
View media item 1932333'94
View media item 1932328'01
View media item 1932329'08
View media item 1932350'11
View media item 1932338
The CDP had horrible quality, but a way better shape than the '11. I wouldn't place all the blame on NTs favorite scapegoat Gentry. He's been gone, and mold problems are still an issue. I still don't see too big of an issue with the 3 as I do other models.
I thought these were going in the vault?
I'm saying I'm good with one pair out of those three models. The Jams are the only pair I don't already own a previous release pair.
**** would get out of hand.
^Agreed. Fully expect to see the White and Black Cement 3's in the same year though.
And imagine if Nike put "Nike Air" on both and released them in a pack!
you realize the 88 pair posted and the the 94 are the same pair right?Me alongside with a few other are always the minority to argue shape. Shout out to the fellas who are quick with the John Madden pen diagrams
However on the Jordan 3, aside from the absence of the 3/4th heel on the OG and '94, the bolder darkened elephant print, elongated tab, and the print being higher on the heel and toe cap. The issue is the shoe slowly losing it's depth on the forefoot giving it a deflated shape. It's not the toe as you say. If there was more depth, the misconception of the toe looking bulky would be there. All these have just about the same toe.
'88
View media item 1932333'94
View media item 1932328'01
View media item 1932329'08
View media item 1932350'11
View media item 1932338
The CDP had horrible quality, but a way better shape than the '11. I wouldn't place all the blame on NTs favorite scapegoat Gentry. He's been gone, and mold problems are still an issue. I still don't see too big of an issue with the 3 as I do other models.
^Agreed. Fully expect to see the White and Black Cement 3's in the same year though.
And imagine if Nike put "Nike Air" on both and released them in a pack!
Oh yeah. It would be like a concord/space jam pack. I don't know what would cause more trouble tbh!
In retrospect, besides the flimsy netting, the 4's from 99 dunked on all the releases. WC4 had a much better shade and didn't look like an ice cream sprinkle, and much better fake leather than the thin crap on the OGs and later releases (2016 less so).
