Confirmed XX3 *edited*

Ok, how was this shoe supposed to be more revolutionary than it is? It has NO GLUE! Its basically a shoe all in one piece. For a performance bball shoe, thatsamazing. We have only seen ONE SIDE of the shoe. Like others have previously pointed out, there is way more to this shoe. Most of you haters are reactingwithout even thinking about the words coming out of your mouths. THERE ARE LIMITS TO SHOE DESIGN! Alot of people are saying that these arent revolutionaryenough. OH really? that leaked pic, alot of you call crap, ugly, a rbk, a dada, and unoriginal is $185.00. Your crying about that price. If the shoe was trullyrevolutionary, do you think its price would be that low???? Could you even afford it???? Would nike be able to produce enough to meet demand???? NO, no, andno. Continuing with this shoe being revolutionary, I want to know from haters how the sahpe of the shoe, which fits on a foot and peoples feet havent changedor mutated, should be different? Is it supposed to be a shoe thats not a shoe? Was the shoe supposed to fit on your head? I would like to know from hatersspecifically with drawings and descriptions how this shoe was supposed to be MORE revolutionary( shape, tech, etc. ) AND be under $200.00? We only have smallidea of what this shoe is. We have one, one-dimensional b&w pic, know the shoe was made with no glue making it one whole piece, and the design was nativeamerican inspired. This idea of the shoe not being revolutionary is a joke because those of you dreaming of how more revolutionary it should have been, werenteven thinking if it was monetarily, or technologically possible to even make such a shoe. MORE TECH=MORE $$$$$=only 5% of the people in this forum being ableto cop. Get a grip on reality haters. The shoe is amazing for what it is.
 
I have to wait until I can hold them in the store.

I hated the XX's when I first seen them but when I saw them in person they became my favorite Jordan's of all time.
 
2zyd6ph.jpg

I can't get over the fact that they look exactly like these. I mean, this shoe is all I see everytime I look at a pic of the XXIII's
 
230
indifferent.gif


I can't wait to hear about the specs of the shoe, hopefully there is something groundbreaking with these....
 
I think the shoe has potential. Besides, these "hate it" naysayers will be the first to cop. I don't see how anyone can form much of an opinionfrom the sketch anyway. Materials, quality, color schemes, so much more to look forward to.

Some of y'all are just bonkers. People who truly have a love for sneakers would not form opinions off a sketch like that. I knew the game changed but damn!
 
Originally Posted by mjmcv23

Idk but i think their charging 230 for the 23 is because 23and add the 0 to the end and u get 230 like 23and 0 =230
Or it can just be because the first pair are limited
ohwell.gif


Still ugly tho!
laugh.gif
 
i'de rather pay +$300 for a radical JORDAN rather than some $180 RBK knockoffs. the same way the III's and IV's and so forth impacted the shoe gameback in 88', JB should've shook the world with something that had the 23'rd version name put on it.

for those that didn't experience the impact of OG JORDAN releases i'll make this short. the price was UNHEARD of to pay for a basketball shoes, peoplewere murdering those to have them, they were placed in movies that were considered classics, and NO OTHER SHOE COMPANY COULD DUPLICATE THE DESIGN!!!!
 
Hating every single JB release id the "cool" thing yo do. If JB had released the 3s,4s,5s,5s,7s,11s,etc. everyone would still call them trash. Theseare going to perform great on the court jus like og Jordan dids. The only things these have against them is the MJ himself has never worn them. Truely though,the XV-XXIII are not going to have the same significance as the I-XIV had, give them a chance and treat the m like what they are, a premiere b-ball shoe fromthe greatest line of shoes of all time.
 
Ok, how was this shoe supposed to be more revolutionary than it is? It has NO GLUE! Its basically a shoe all in one piece. For a performance bball shoe, thats
amazing. We have only seen ONE SIDE of the shoe. Like others have previously pointed out, there is way more to this shoe. Most of you haters are reacting
without even thinking about the words coming out of your mouths. THERE ARE LIMITS TO SHOE DESIGN! Alot of people are saying that these arent revolutionary
enough. OH really? that leaked pic, alot of you call crap, ugly, a rbk, a dada, and unoriginal is $185.00. Your crying about that price. If the shoe was trully
revolutionary, do you think its price would be that low???? Could you even afford it???? Would nike be able to produce enough to meet demand???? NO, no, and
no. Continuing with this shoe being revolutionary, I want to know from haters how the sahpe of the shoe, which fits on a foot and peoples feet havent changed
or mutated, should be different? Is it supposed to be a shoe thats not a shoe? Was the shoe supposed to fit on your head? I would like to know from haters
specifically with drawings and descriptions how this shoe was supposed to be MORE revolutionary( shape, tech, etc. ) AND be under $200.00? We only have small
idea of what this shoe is. We have one, one-dimensional b&w pic, we know the shoe was made with no glue making it one whole piece, and the design wasnative
american inspired. This idea of the shoe not being revolutionary is a joke because those of you dreaming of how more revolutionary it should have been, werent
even thinking if it was monetarily, or technologically possible to even make such a shoe. MORE TECH=MORE $$$$$=only 5%( at most ) of the people in this forumbeing able
to cop. Get a grip on reality haters. The shoe is amazing for what it is.

All those people saying these look like Iversons on pg. 34 are out of their minds. How is it they look like Iversons? If the XXIII reference details of the III& XIII and they look like those iversons, doesnt that mean that rbk copied details from AJ XIII? Its ok for rbk to steal design cues from another shoe butits not ok for Tinker to bring in details from his own shoe designs????? You people are rediculous. You are just talking to hear yourself talk without eventhinking about what your saying. You basically know nothing. I'll let Tinker be the designer with years upon years of experience with countless classicshoe designs and you be the unintelligent critic. To say the XXIII looks like any specific shoe without seeing all the details of the shoe is just jumping toconclusions. I reiterate, I would like to know from haters specifically with drawings and descriptions how this shoe was supposed to be MORE revolutionary(shape, tech, etc. ) AND be under $200.00? I want that hate, again, to be backed up with drawings and ideas of hows much better you could have designed theXXIII. I know that wont happen though. Most of you couldnt even draw a stick figure much less design a whole shoe from the ground up. The best you can do ispost a crap-a*s pic of an iverson shoe. You dont know s**t. If you think otherwise, prove me and all the other members on this forum who like the XXIII wrong.Other than that, get out of here haters.
 
damn dude is mad, but he has a point. i think the shoe is the$$%!! it looks good and i think that a real color pic will shut everyone up
 
I like it but it has inspired feelings in me the same way every release does.
I go from hate to love. and i dont mind admitting it. I hated the 8's soooooo much when they first came out and now they are my favorite model.
 
I don't frequent the JB forum, so this is my first time seeing them; if this is the 23...I have ZERO problem with them. They look really good...
 
Back
Top Bottom