Niketalk what is the difference between Polo and U.S. Polo Association

[coldcity]

Originally Posted by FedExciter

yall dudes are googling shirts talking about ''heres a quality shirt'''

how can u speak on the quality of something u never touched, wore, or washed repeatedly???????

and stop talking about the price of %%$+, i never once mentioned any prices or stores


''i googled this'' ''i googled that'' get out the house and touch some of these fabrics, how can u tell how quality something is by looking online

if u wear $5 footlockers joints then do your thing, not once in this thread did I clown anybody for not rocking with RL


homeboy posted a link to some polo with 3/4 length sleeves, u cant ever speak to me about fashion again , nope, uh uh ...enjoy yall nights

 

[coldcity]

capri polo shirt

 

[fedexciter]

^ you feel me, talkin bout ''this quality fam i google it, google dont lie''

sleeves longer than the wait at the dmv

 

[hankmoody]

There is definitely a difference in quality but the price is still inflated due to branding so it's a little bit of both.

I bought some polo shirts from LL Bean and am completely satisfied. Plus, no logo.

 

[0cks]

Originally Posted by FedExciter

^ you feel me, talkin bout ''this quality fam i google it, google dont lie''

sleeves longer than the wait at the dmv

Clothing threads on NT are the best

 

[prymone]

Originally Posted by Rex Ryan

uspa is for poor people.

/thread

 

[frijo sneaker]

Lol

 

[ninjahood]

Originally Posted by cartune

Fubu was "great quality"

Not enough white people were wearing it tho

Oh yeah? Youtube "pretty fly for a white guy" offspring And only NT can have cats DEFENDING USPAFor sellin knockoff polo and in da same sentence, tryin to burnAir randy at da cross...smh lol

 

[you go boy]

is this a serious question 

 

[cocotaso1]

Originally Posted by Frank Mucus

Originally Posted by sooperhooper

It's funny how little respect Chaps gets even tho it's made by RL too.

Chaps is no different than Lauren from Ralph Lauren. It's licensed out and it's garbage due to the company holding the license.

i thought chaps was sold off years ago, thats why its the house brand at kohls and you dont see "by ralph lauren" on the tags anymore.

 

[monstar1]

Originally Posted by cocotaso1

Originally Posted by Frank Mucus

Originally Posted by sooperhooper

It's funny how little respect Chaps gets even tho it's made by RL too.

Chaps is no different than Lauren from Ralph Lauren. It's licensed out and it's garbage due to the company holding the license.

i thought chaps was sold off years ago, thats why its the house brand at kohls and you dont see "by ralph lauren" on the tags anymore.

Yeah I think you're right.  I could never rock with a Chaps polo.  Felt like wearing them fake foamposites Nike made 10 years ago. can't remember the name of them

  

 

[scientific method]

Solo Flight

 

[fenixconnexion.]

Originally Posted by RavageBX

Originally Posted by Addict4Sneakers

$60 to $70 !@#% ^*)$) beat it

Beat me to my reply 

 

[scientific method]

All this materials talk, 100% organic cotton, 7 bucks

 

[coldcity]

how ya shirt have bacon neck & its brand new

damb shame

 

[p0tat0 5alad]

I agree with OP. I went through that phase of materialism in HS. Now I just wear what I like and what is comfortable. *shrugs*

 

[cels the younggod]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by cartune

Fubu was "great quality"

Not enough white people were wearing it tho

Oh yeah? Youtube "pretty fly for a white guy" offspring And only NT can have cats DEFENDING USPAFor sellin knockoff polo and in da same sentence, tryin to burnAir randy at da cross...smh lol

Touche 

 

[lstylez23]

trolling at its best

 

[quik1987]

For record, Polo ain't even called Polo anymore, it's just "Ralph Lauren".

 

[cronicmolemolereturns]

Originally Posted by DIOR PAINT

I wish people would just admit that they're materialistic. ##!%## in here talking about shirt quality and cotton blends and !!#*. Let's be honest...none of us really cares about any of that !!#*. 

I care.

 

[Mark Antony]

Bout 2 horses %%$% sucker, beat it.

 

[jmb1523]

Originally Posted by Scientific Method

All this materials talk, 100% organic cotton, 7 bucks

But that doesnt mean the shirt has great quality.  Faded glory shirts are 100% cotton but they are rough as hell.
Wash that shirt a few times and tell me how it looks and feels.

Just buy what you want, don't try to justify your thrifty purchases to us.

 

[cronicmolemolereturns]

Originally Posted by Frank Mucus

cotton is more breathable than a synthetic poly blend...

Dri-fit wicks moisture away, does nothing about breathability.

Regardless, there is an apparent difference in quality. It could be from the materials used or the craftsmanship, hence the different tiers of RL as I mentioned earlier.

Polyester is man made devil's fabric. That's why you sweat like a Yugoslavian $$$*@. RL isn't in the upper echelon of clothing brands when it comes to quality IMO. It is perfect for lower-middle class consumers though, especially when stacked against U.S Polo Association.

 

[outlaw8413]

Originally Posted by Rex Ryan

uspa is for poor people.

 

[blacklion23]

Originally Posted by FIRST B0RN

Antidope wrote:

---

We all know the answer to this question. Superficial mentality is the difference between them, and I own a lot of Ralph Lauren and no USPA at all. Shirts are shirts when it comes down to it and the extra money we pay is for ourselves whether it be to impress others or to for ourselves. That being said I'm blessed to be in a situation where I can even make a choice like that cause all around the world theres people who can't even comprehend this choice and would just take a shirt period.

This