Jon Jones will fight Daniel Cormier at UFC 178

[Guest John Hancock]

He was squaring up to Junior dos Santos. That's right, Nike sponsored athlete Junior dos Santos. That's who you saw.

[Guest The Beltster]

Sorry my brain couldnt compute what you wrote and I'm not being sarcastic, I read it several times and I just couldnt seem to make sense of it. Are you saying skate shoe companies make better shoes than Nike?

 

And I'm pretty sure thats Jon Jones he squares off against, unless JDS is black and has a top quality afro.

Edited September 23, 2014 by The Beltster

[Guest John Hancock]

And I'm pretty sure thats Jon Jones he squares off against, unless JDS is black and has a top quality afro.

 

Mr. Jones is no longer a Nike endorsed athlete. The man you saw in that advert was Junior dos Santos.

[Guest The Beltster]

Oh I see now. Yes. You're right.

[Evil Gringo 279]

Sorry my brain couldnt compute what you wrote and I'm not being sarcastic, I read it several times and I just couldnt seem to make sense of it. Are you saying skate shoe companies make better shoes than Nike?

 

And I'm pretty sure thats Jon Jones he squares off against, unless JDS is black and has a top quality afro.

 

Depends on what you want the shoes for. Athletic shoes and football boots Nike followed by Adidas, casual wear Vans, Nike Air and Adidas classic. Its all down to personal preferance really.

[Guest The Beltster]

I'd put Nike above everybody for comfort and looks in basketball shoes, thats all I buy from them. Not sure what their other stuff is like. Adidas make horrible hoop shoes, Reebok make excellent retros. But for playing it and for casual wear, Nike's hoop shoes are the best. I dont like Vans and those sorts of skate shoes, they always look 4 sizes too big on peoples feet like clown shoes.

[Evil Gringo 279]

I'd put Nike above everybody for comfort and looks in basketball shoes, thats all I buy from them. Not sure what their other stuff is like. Adidas make horrible hoop shoes, Reebok make excellent retros. But for playing it and for casual wear, Nike's hoop shoes are the best. I dont like Vans and those sorts of skate shoes, they always look 4 sizes too big on peoples feet like clown shoes.

 

Oh some do, the actual shoes they do for skating, along with DC and Adio with the reinforced toe caps and such always look massive. But Vans do some nice shoes that are just for casual wear - as they are by Vans they are technically skate shoes but have nothing really in common with their oversized brethren.

 

Plus at the Vans shop in the Trafford Centre you can get a nice pair for around £40-£50.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Evil Gringo

[Guest The Beltster]

I wish I could bag my shoes for £40-50 :/

[Evil Gringo 279]

Considering it costs about £30 including shipping after the little unfortunates have made the goods in a cut price factory in China, the cost of trainers as a whole is mental.

 

But if people want them and buy them at that price then the companies would be crazy to drop it. Then again, when Foot Locker have a sale there are sometimes some surprising bargains to be found. Maybe not £50 but closer to £80 which for top of the line Nike trainers is decent.

[Guest John Hancock]

Nike have had to release four athletes in two weeks for morality issues; Jon Jones, Adrian Peterson, Ray Rice and Oscar Pistorius. That's a violent drunk, a child abuser, a wife-beater and a murderer for anyone keeping score.

[Guest The Beltster]

Considering it costs about £30 including shipping after the little unfortunates have made the goods in a cut price factory in China, the cost of trainers as a whole is mental.

 

But if people want them and buy them at that price then the companies would be crazy to drop it. Then again, when Foot Locker have a sale there are sometimes some surprising bargains to be found. Maybe not £50 but closer to £80 which for top of the line Nike trainers is decent.

When I get a top like pair of Nike KD's, LeBrons or Kobes for under £100 I feel like I should send Nike a thank you card.

 

Nike's Jordan Brand on the other hand, they can take as much as they want, I need the new J's.

[Guest John Hancock]

I think it's a general sort of cultural mistake to compare Reebok/Nike/Adidas to Vans/Converse from the off, they're really just not comparable outside of "they go on your feet". The market and the history and the culture and the attitude toward luxury, and money and showing off of basketball-ly, East Coast, inner city, black, sneaker-dom is about as far removed from West Coast, suburban, white, skate-punk as you can get whilst still talking about essentially the same item of clothing.

 

If you made a $300 Vans, firstly, no one would buy it, and, secondly, if anyone did, no one would get shot for it.

[Guest The Beltster]

Its funny because Converse started off as a basketball kick and were made famous by Chuck Taylor, who was as black as you can get and a basketball player. Now the main people you see wearing them are women, in pink.

[Evil Gringo 279]

Yeah Converse in the 90's onwards became more and more a female item of clothing. I know there are still men's out there, I know there are a few good looking pairs out there but they know it seems which side of their bread is buttered (at least in the UK) and are targeting the female demographic more and more.

 

I was wrong as well when I said there was no relation between causal Vans and actual skate shoe Vans - the grip on the sole of the shoe is exactly the same, well at least on mine.

Edited September 25, 2014 by Evil Gringo

[dsrchris 190]

Aren't Converse owned by nike now anyways?