- 25,769
- 18,825
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2003
if you're referring to the 11's then yes thats a good argument and i wouldnt deny it...
Air Jordan 11 Retro- Black/Red “Playoff”- 12/14/2019
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by Bert.,
- Start date
if you're referring to the 11's then yes thats a good argument and i wouldnt deny it...
- 14,053
- 14,232
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
so u agree. if u look at concords that just released as well as the last SJ retro, it's not the same as the OG, but you suggested it was.My apologies to you. I'm just going off what mine look like. I don't see much difference.
- 10,468
- 22,823
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
The 23 on this new retro does resemble the original. From pics I see and the pair I own, thats my take on it. As far as how it was pressed ironed or what ever I really dont know the difference. These numbers dont peel off as fast as everyone makes them out to.
- 24,441
- 22,117
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
I would say these are in the mix for GOAT Jordan.... Chicago’s, Concords, Blk/Cement 3s, and BT Unions all are up there as well.
- 13,328
- 11,556
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2009
IMO BT Unions don’t even make the list of GOAT J’s.
- 24,441
- 22,117
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
Blasphemous.
rainking
Supporter
- 8,124
- 17,545
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2016
This is the last thing I'm saying about the red tint, as either way these will be cool. No, it really isn't a huge deal.
But saying it shouldn't be a thing at all because it wasn't intended ... I can't relate to that line of thinking. No one even knew it was unintentional up until not that long ago. Many pairs had it, including MJ's. Now that we know it wasn't on purpose, we're supposed to unsee it from the OG pairs? Or supposed to pretend it's a feature I haven't thought was cool and unique for more than two decades? I can't do that. But those latest pics indicate these will have it, so it's all good to me
But saying it shouldn't be a thing at all because it wasn't intended ... I can't relate to that line of thinking. No one even knew it was unintentional up until not that long ago. Many pairs had it, including MJ's. Now that we know it wasn't on purpose, we're supposed to unsee it from the OG pairs? Or supposed to pretend it's a feature I haven't thought was cool and unique for more than two decades? I can't do that. But those latest pics indicate these will have it, so it's all good to me
- 24,441
- 22,117
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
This is the last thing I'm saying about the red tint, as either way these will be cool. No, it really isn't a huge deal.
But saying it shouldn't be a thing at all because it wasn't intended ... I can't relate to that line of thinking. No one even knew it was unintentional up until not that long ago. Many pairs had it, including MJ's. Now that we know it wasn't on purpose, we're supposed to unsee it from the OG pairs? Or supposed to pretend it's a feature I haven't thought was cool and unique for more than two decades? I can't do that. But those latest pics indicate these will have it, so it's all good to me
Anyone who dismisses the red tint is a moron. Nothing else needs to be said.
- 10,468
- 22,823
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
It hurts you to play nice doesnt it?
- 22,041
- 31,245
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
Jordans pair had it. I’ll take it. They do look nice without it tho. Either way I’ll take it.
- 22,041
- 31,245
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
How dope would it be if some pairs had it and some didn’t. I’d definitely need 1 of each. But that’s just me
- 10,468
- 22,823
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
I agree with all here. But, I will be the first to say if it dont have it I wont care. If it does, thats great for sure. What I find so funny is how it effects so many in here just by the talk of it. The heel talk was crazy. But didnt we find out that was just apart of the heel stretching process and not really a design intention? Thing is people like us look at an original under a microscope. Some want it all back, some dont care about other details. Why cant we accept the conversation instead of just simply laughing at it and trying to dismiss it?This is the last thing I'm saying about the red tint, as either way these will be cool. No, it really isn't a huge deal.
But saying it shouldn't be a thing at all because it wasn't intended ... I can't relate to that line of thinking. No one even knew it was unintentional up until not that long ago. Many pairs had it, including MJ's. Now that we know it wasn't on purpose, we're supposed to unsee it from the OG pairs? Or supposed to pretend it's a feature I haven't thought was cool and unique for more than two decades? I can't do that. But those latest pics indicate these will have it, so it's all good to me
- 24,441
- 22,117
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
- 100
- 310
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
I think the fact that the red tint was unintentional (and only evidenced on some of the OG pairs) is highly relevant to the real issue: whether or not the red hue was a defect. In my opinion it was, and as such, it’s no different than a glue stain.
If you like the look of the red tint - which I certainly don’t - that’s understandable. But if you want it simply for the sake of tradition, your reasoning places you in a strange position.
Incorporating original defects into retro reproductions would be problematic and unpopular in almost every other instance. I really don’t understand why there’s so much debate in this case.
If you like the look of the red tint - which I certainly don’t - that’s understandable. But if you want it simply for the sake of tradition, your reasoning places you in a strange position.
Incorporating original defects into retro reproductions would be problematic and unpopular in almost every other instance. I really don’t understand why there’s so much debate in this case.
- 10,468
- 22,823
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
If it was a defect, how did it end up on MJs pairs?
- 22,041
- 31,245
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
Unintentional and defective are 2 very different things.
- 100
- 310
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
Good point. I forgot that Jordan received only those shoes that were constructed perfectly in line with the intentions of the divine Nike maker.
- 10,468
- 22,823
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
- 100
- 310
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
Perhaps they are in isolation.
But if you’re trying to construct a shoe with a black nylon upper, and it unintentionally turns out red, that qualifies as a defect.
- 22,041
- 31,245
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
Since you wanna get super technical, cosmetic defect, yeah ok I’ll give you that. If it was that serious Nike would have recalled the shoes.
It’s like the 10’s having jumpmans facingbin different directions. Some factories make them that way others don’t. So if we’re being super technical then no it’s not a defect at all. It’s just how they came out from those factories.
- 10,468
- 22,823
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2016
So the “red tint” upper apperance was a manufacturing difference...the made in taiwan appeared to have a tint & the china pairs was straight black....hope the ‘19s is straight black too
Tha homie @chitownog11 was spot on
Taiwan left/ china right
Anybody remember this?
- 100
- 310
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
I don’t think I was being technical at all. We’re discussing the aesthetics of the shoe, so obviously “defect” implies “cosmetic defect”.
Like I said previously, if you like the look of the red tint, good for you. I don’t. I owned at least 4 pair of the OGs in the 90s and I’m planning to buy 2 pair of the retro in December. I want the black mesh to be black. The red tint was a defect. That’s my opinion.
- 14,618
- 19,471
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2008
- 944
- 278
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2008
Hey, I thought it should be true red instead of varsity red.
- 100
- 310
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
