- Oct 6, 2016
- 10,650
- 23,669
Just contradicted yourself.I'm saying man. It's almost like NT is against the notion that we all have different preferences...
With that said... Reported for the AMM3 comment.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just contradicted yourself.I'm saying man. It's almost like NT is against the notion that we all have different preferences...
With that said... Reported for the AMM3 comment.
OG with today's shape.Serious question for all out there. For any model Jordan. OG color with today shapes, or plus color with OG shape? To me, JB likes playing these games regarding this. What would you be more willing to buy?
But if it was switched around and the OG shape was the current shape and vice versa yall would switch it up too.
Ill give yall another shocker, AMM3’s right up there with BC3’s as best 3’s ever. Yep, ever. Debatable which one is top dog.
Im 32. Shape aint THAT big of a deal unless its wildly weird looking, yall 45 year olds really draggin it.
Complaining about the 3s when Reebok been consistently droppin reebok questions in premium uppers and decent collabs. Y’all hold jb to a different standard aka none
Lmao!!!!To be fair, Reebok has the time to put in the effort because they only make one shoe that people like.
Nope. Hadn’t bought a III since 2003 till AMMs, and it’s tied with XI as my favorite model—when it looks like it’s supposed to. The OG is GOAT because of the way it looked overall, not because it was the OG. If it looked like the crap retro version, it wouldn’t be my favorite. It would be on the list of Jordans I don’t like. For example, I wouldn’t buy an VIII if it came brand new out of a time machine from ‘93.And yall still copped.
Nope. Hadn’t bought a III since 2003 till AMMs, and it’s tied with XI as my favorite model—when it looks like it’s supposed to. The OG is GOAT because of the way it looked overall, not because it was the OG. If it looked like the crap retro version, it wouldn’t be my favorite. It would be on the list of Jordans I don’t like. For example, I wouldn’t buy an VIII if it came brand new out of a time machine from ‘93.
You keep saying we’re dragging it. News flash: that’s how you effect change. You probably thought complaints about the previous version of the XI was dragging it, too. If not for that, they probably never would’ve fixed it. If you genuinely prefer the retros, great. But that’s irrelevant to the point pretty much everyone else is making.
Most people just want the shoes and don't care about anything we talk about on here.News flash also: it probably not gonna change. Why? Cause most people are fine with the shape.
Most people just want the shoes and don't care about anything we talk about on here.
That's precisely why we use this forum. To talk about shoes with other people that share a similar passion.
Then you come along and say we shouldn't talk about it.
Good times.
That's precisely why we use this forum. To talk about shoes with other people that share a similar passion.
Then you come along and say we shouldn't talk about it.
Good times.
You saying im saying not to talk about it…but im literally also talking about it.
Agreed. It’s actually beneficial to discuss some of the flaws because it could be eventually fixed in the future.
The newer shape is almost a decent mold.
They improved and minimized the EP height, fixed the ankle collar height, and also minimized the padding around the ankle.
Using Girl Thats Jules photo as reference…
IMO this is one area they need to improve on and make more consistent.
I’ve seen a lot of pairs with the same issue where there’s a slight curve around the mid foot towards the back of the shoe. This might have to do more with the manufacturing process when they are attaching the upper to the midsole/sole which is causing this design flaw.
You're free to like whichever rendition of these you prefer. Talk about it all you'd like as well.
Other people have different experiences then you. They'd also like to talk about it. And that's OK.
Right?
See this is where I agree with picasso swerve like seriously who's paying attention to this? Like even though you pointed it out I still don't see what you're talking about. Y'all are nitpicking. Shoes weren't perfect back then, they aren't perfect now..Agreed. It’s actually beneficial to discuss some of the flaws because it could be eventually fixed in the future.
The newer shape is almost a decent mold.
They improved and minimized the EP height, fixed the ankle collar height, and also minimized the padding around the ankle.
Using Girl Thats Jules photo as reference…
IMO this is one area they need to improve on and make more consistent.
I’ve seen a lot of pairs with the same issue where there’s a slight curve around the mid foot towards the back of the shoe. This might have to do more with the manufacturing process when they are attaching the upper to the midsole/sole which is causing this design flaw.