Okay /fa/ lets settle this once and for all.
What is your go to brand and why?
For me it's going to have to be Nike just because I grew up wearing them and I consider them to be the pioneers of the whole shoe game.
>>11771048
adidas > nike > reebok > jordan
>>11771048
can i only pick from the 4?
if so, adidas
if not, asics onitsuka tiger
>Let's settle this once and for all
I hate when people say this, like any post makes a difference to the board.
>Nike
Kill yourself
Adidas is too tier, clearly
Remove Jordan. Why would you list them separately? They are a subset of Nike.
>>11771048
Adidas > Reebok > Nike
This is obvious
Nike = Adidas > Reebok
I have both AF1 and superstars, and like wearing both equally. Never was a fan of Reeboks, though.
I'm not going to consider Jordans because they are a subset of Nike.
>>11771060
Then at that point OP should remove reebok since it's owned by Adidas
>>11771066
Maybe, but Jordans' designs are far more similar to Nike than any Reebok is to Adidas.
OP here. Choices are not based off picture. You can choose Birkenstocks if you like. Pretty much any footwear is applicable.
>>11771065
Nah
Nike is best, sans Jordan. Adidas is okay for classic shoes. Reebok is strictly thrift tier.
>>11771048
Vans>Nike=Adidas>JO'DHANS>Reebok
I mean, those are athelitic lines, and most of the "sneakers" they put out are over-priced, safe rehashes.
At least Vans just has the 3 or 4 shoes.They're prefect for what they are.
PS New Balance is better than Jordans and reebok, but not as good as adidas or nike
>>11771048
Uh....
None?
>>11771081
>Vans
>Vans over All
Looks like somebody still goes to High School
>>11771074
They're both best for classic shoes. Even classic Jordans (1s) are pretty nice. Most new models that either Adidas or Nike offers are either 1. strictly athletic, and hence not good-looking, 2. over-designed, or 3. hype-beasty.
>>11771056
>hates when people say this
>continues to shit post with shit taste in footwear
>>11771048
I grew up without a bias towards nigger shoes
>>11771087
not an argument.
Vans is the superior
>>11771106
>>11771081
Vans are shit tier. They used to be decent prior to 2010 tho.
>>11771106
>Vans is the superior
>posts eytys
>shitpost harder
>>11771119
as someone who still wears vans, this is correct.
>>11771130
The girl's wearing vans
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_No_Mouth,_and_I_Must_Scream
>>11771048
well according to most sheep on this board its adidas>everything but in reality its nike>adidas
>>11771048
K-swiss
>>11772300
And they look like shit
>>11771048
adidas>reebok>nike
all are complete shit aside from a few collabs. consumerist, homogenized bullshit that makes you look like any generic young person that dresses safe and sub-standard to please others.
>>11772468
This isn't the only place that thinks that. Most of the sneaker boards think the same.
>>11773017
nike and adidas are pretty much on par imo. quality sneakers with good design
>>11772468
>if you don't like what I like then you're a sheep
kys
>>11773036
This
In twenty years people will still be wearing the classics from both companies, while the meme shoes of today will be long forgotten
nike / some jordans