Should "hybrids/fusions" count as retro sneakers?

[gerawrd]

If there is a post about this already, I'm sorry. I haven't made too many new posts so lay off. I'm not about making new posts either but I thinkthis is a legitimate discussion. Nike is running this concept into a full sprint, which is raising concern for me as a shoe head. I'm a big fan of late90's basketball sneakers, LOVE the Garnett III...HATE the Zoom Fun Police. BUT, as a younger shoe head i'm not as familiar with the new models thatare created by fusing 2 older 80s to 90s basketball shoes. Shoes like the Nike RT1, Air Hoop Structure, Nike Auto Flight are beginning to take the stage.



These shoes are influenced by older models infused with modern style. I'm gonna say even the Yeezys have some form of 80s to early 90s nike basketballinfluence on them. Personally, I like these shoes, they have a nice retro look and aren't too flashy (except the yeezys of course).

BUT, I never saw the original shoes as a kid, because I was too young to appreciate them. The Zoom Fun Police is a perfect example, because thats something Ican relate to when it comes to me appreciating the original sneaker. The Garnett III came out when i was in the 7th grade. I loved those shoes and alwayswanted a pair. All the cool kids had em. But seeing these

Made me want to throw up.

I can also place this in the Jordan thread, because the Jordan fusions are probably a larger concern for shoe heads in the community...but majority of jordanheads are disgusted by fusions. Many of the "fusions" in the nike retro thread get a little/a lot more love from the community, and i just want tohear some opinions from older shoe heads. It doesn't look like the hybrid/fusion train will stop soon...so will we learn to embrace it?

P.S. Pics are stolen. Googled so i dont remember the sites.

 

[Sinner]

I guess its one of those grey-area questions... technically, they're a 'new' shoe, but if its comprised of retro 'components' is it still a'new' shoe?

Some members spend most of their time in the Retro section, maybe because they only like the Retros and are not interested in the new stuff Nike puts out. So,to me, it makes sense to catagorize it as a 'Retro' simply for the sake of letting the Retro-heads discuss about the shoe. Just my 2 cents...

 

[ninjahood]

I consider yeezys retros.......I mean its got da entire jordan III/revolution/assault midsole & outsole.

 

[huaracheking1914]

retro = bringing an old shoe back with SLIGHT, or little to no, changes

hybrid = putting a whole bunch of diff. shoes (old or not) together, therefore making a new shoe

conclusion: hybrids, to me, are not retros

 

[gingerdunks]

I like those Auto Flights!!! I was wondering if they would retro Sonic Flights? What is the other shoe they mixed with it?

 

[suguruvstotoro]

Was any of those shoes previously released...?

NO.

The only retro hybrids/fusions are the ones released previously.

If Nike air max light was considered a "fusion/hybrid" shoe (87 + 90), it'll be a fusion retro.
Yeezys are horrible NEW fusions based on retro shoes.

IMO, yeezys shouldn't be mixed with grails like air max 87s, trainer Is, tech challenges, blazers, force 1s, revolutions, 180s.....

 

[corporatejp]

"Grey-area" is a huge understatement.

 

[gerawrd]

Originally Posted by suguruvstotoro

Was any of those shoes previously released...?

NO.

The only retro hybrids/fusions are the ones released previously.

If Nike air max light was considered a "fusion/hybrid" shoe (87 + 90), it'll be a fusion retro.
Yeezys are horrible NEW fusions based on retro shoes.

IMO, yeezys shouldn't be mixed with grails like air max 87s, trainer Is, tech challenges, blazers, force 1s, revolutions, 180s.....

may i ask how old you are? were you into shoes in the late 80s early 90s? because I can only trace back and remember shoes from like 95 onward (i was 9 or10 at the time), so I don't have as much appreciation for the older kicks than most. I'm not a big fan of yeezys either.

 

[gerawrd]

Originally Posted by gingerdunks

I like those Auto Flights!!! I was wondering if they would retro Sonic Flights? What is the other shoe they mixed with it?

The Nike Auto Flight fuses the Nike Air Flight Lite basketball shoe with thevulcanized midsole of the Nike Blazer SB. (Courtesy ofSneakerfiles.com)

 

[Magic33]

Fusions and Hybrids aren't retros to me

If they didn't come out before, they're virtually a new sneaker
Nike has always used concepts from prior releases for sneakers.
Is every sneaker with patent leather going to be considered a retro, because of the Jordan XI?

 

[modzzilla]

This should not be in retro until you determine if they are retro or not.

Once it is decided they are retro you should post this in retro, once decided they are not retro you should leave it whereever it is.

Datz wat i tink.

 

[suguruvstotoro]

Originally Posted by GeRAWRd

Originally Posted by suguruvstotoro

Was any of those shoes previously released...?

NO.

The only retro hybrids/fusions are the ones released previously.

If Nike air max light was considered a "fusion/hybrid" shoe (87 + 90), it'll be a fusion retro.
Yeezys are horrible NEW fusions based on retro shoes.

IMO, yeezys shouldn't be mixed with grails like air max 87s, trainer Is, tech challenges, blazers, force 1s, revolutions, 180s.....

may i ask how old you are? were you into shoes in the late 80s early 90s? because I can only trace back and remember shoes from like 95 onward (i was 9 or 10 at the time), so I don't have as much appreciation for the older kicks than most. I'm not a big fan of yeezys either.

I'm 33y old.
I was into shoes years before MJ signed with Nike.
Some "older kicks" are better than "new ones". Some "news" are better than "old ones".
The only thing is to know as much as you can to make your decision for wich one is better.
Your question was if new models (based in old ones) can be considered as retros. My opinion: NO.

I understand young ones when they feel new models are better than old ones. I had the same opinion 20 years ago!!

 

[vagrantpistol]

They should be new shoes because they have never been on the market before. A retro is something that is being re-released, not a component of a shoe that is.So no, they should be considered NEW as this is the first time they have been released.

 

[omarlistenin]

I concur, fusions and hybrids are most definitely not retros - they are brand new.

Retro = copy of the originals.
Hybrid/fusion = entirely new thing.

 

[eebs7eez]

i consider them retro's if they're comprised of all retro components (for the most part).

 

[gerawrd]

Originally Posted by suguruvstotoro

Originally Posted by GeRAWRd

Originally Posted by suguruvstotoro

Was any of those shoes previously released...?

NO.

The only retro hybrids/fusions are the ones released previously.

If Nike air max light was considered a "fusion/hybrid" shoe (87 + 90), it'll be a fusion retro.
Yeezys are horrible NEW fusions based on retro shoes.

IMO, yeezys shouldn't be mixed with grails like air max 87s, trainer Is, tech challenges, blazers, force 1s, revolutions, 180s.....

may i ask how old you are? were you into shoes in the late 80s early 90s? because I can only trace back and remember shoes from like 95 onward (i was 9 or 10 at the time), so I don't have as much appreciation for the older kicks than most. I'm not a big fan of yeezys either.

I'm 33y old.
I was into shoes years before MJ signed with Nike.
Some "older kicks" are better than "new ones". Some "news" are better than "old ones".
The only thing is to know as much as you can to make your decision for wich one is better.
Your question was if new models (based in old ones) can be considered as retros. My opinion: NO.

I understand young ones when they feel new models are better than old ones. I had the same opinion 20 years ago!!

oh dude i wasn't questioning your answer, i just wanted to know your point of view. I was curious how older shoe heads (not calling you old though) feltabout nike borrowing concepts from shoes they grew up with and loved. I was wondering if you felt the same way that i feel about Nike mixing together 90sconcepts (like the zoom fun police) and it looks like you kinda do. I'm 22, so you're pretty much a generation ahead of me on sneakers. I try torespect the viewpoints of those that were into shoes before me (you have been for a good 15 years) and I try to keep up on the history of a shoe before I buythem. Since i'm not as familiar with the "older" shoes, when nike fuses them I tend to like what I see...but it's hard for me to accept thatif they start doing it with sneakers I grew up around and loved. I initially got into shoes because of Jordans, and I almost quit the shoe game when I sawthem mixing jordans with AF1's. Just my opinion

 

[ScroogeMcBuckz]

If the model hasn't released before, they not retros, PERIOD.

 

[vegatts]

Thats a good question, and I would say no,
retros are shoe models that have been released in the past.

Funny how the longest thread on page one of the retro forum is for the Half Cents (IMO a very well done hybrid, but not an actual retro)

 

[losalmighty]

I don't think of Hybrids/fusions as retros. They've never came out before and even if they are made from old parts, they are put together in a NEW way.