So UnderArmor just came out with shoes...

the juggernaught biatch wrote:

these shoes are so tight, I dont even needa condom

8/10

I just became part of Team Under Armour Run for 2009. I did wear the shoes in the Baltimore Marathon and was quite pleased. The best thing they had going for them was the ability to keep my feet dry. They also are made with a tongue sleeve, sort of like the hold Nike Hurrache's. they are very comfortable, and easy to wear.

I believe the line will just get better and better!

R

OPPS! you'Re right. good thing i didN'T buy them!!!!!!!

Auntie Trudy wrote:

Letsrun remedial grammar lesson:

Incorrect:

. . . has anyone RAN in them . . .

Correct:

. . . has anyone RUN in them . . .

Any questions?

How about "non-standard" for "incorrect" and "standard" for "correct"?

tunkcart wrote:

Like the rest of their products, it's likely to be reasonable quality but way overpriced. For any particular UA product, you can buy something just as good or better for much less.

You could make the same case with Nike and Adidas products. The difference between Nike and Under Armour are the horrible commercials UA makes.

Josue wrote:How about "non-standard" for "incorrect" and "standard" for "correct"?

No, in this case "incorrect" and "correct" were the appropriate descriptions.

The UA running shoes were not originally Fila. The guy, Chris, who now heads up the run footwear division at UA used to work for Fila (and Mizuno). So, I guess you could say there is a bit of Fila and Mizuno personality in the shoes but they are definitely not Fila.

Oh forgot to add... I have to say that I really enjoyed the pair I received - I believe it was the Spectre - neutral shoe. I have been running in the Saucony Ride and Mizuno Rider for awhile and the fit & performance was very similar. The foot sleeve was snug around the arch but I tend to like that sensation given that my arch is a bit higher. Overall I give the shoe (and the line) thumbs up and I hope everyone at least gives that brand a try!

I don't see why they wouldn't want to cater to the "endurance athlete". There is a lot of money to be made in this market, especially with a brand already established and acclaimed like UA's. How much more could they cater to the Big 3? they seem to have that sect locked up.

If they made good running shoes, an uninformed runner would probably end up buying the UA shoe over a company that's a little more niche, such as Brooks/Mizuno/Saucony/etc.

They are narrow as f*#@

It wouldn't surprise me to see Under Armour have a sponsored track & field athlete on an Olympic team in 2012; in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if a Under Armour sponsored track & field athlete gets on the medal podium before a Brooks or Saucony athlete. I also wouldn't be surprised if they sponsor a federation soon...

Under Armour is going after the big boys!

they are like underware for your feet

quote]ShoeGeekChicago wrote:

The UA running shoes were not originally Fila. The guy, Chris, who now heads up the run footwear division at UA used to work for Fila (and Mizuno). So, I guess you could say there is a bit of Fila and Mizuno personality in the shoes but they are definitely not Fila.[/quote]

ShoeGeekDC here - I was about to say the same thing. The Mizuno and Fila personalities are both pretty obvious in some of these. If you're in contact with Chris, can you remind him that some of us really liked the Fila Racer and Corsa Sette and wouldn't mind seeing a similar shoe from UA (or for that matter, anybody). I stockpiled Corsa Settes when I heard Fila was discontinuing their running line, but they won't last forever...[

yeah, my point in saying "when they were called fila" was to point out the similarities. I haven't seen the shoes except online but the UA shoes just immediately reminded me of fila. Whatever UA is using really looked similar to fila's flow technology for responsive cushioning and in some cases pronation control. it was my understanding that they guy who was most recently designing fila's running footwear was heading up the UA stuff. I know that he was a designer, or the designer of the mizuno footwear as recently as a few years ago as well.

there were some fila models that, when people actually tried on, really liked. their only problem was selling "fila" and people didn't seem to like the look of the product either. for all the football and baseball goons though, the UA alone will sell it to them. funny how that works. of course for some of the runner goons, the UA might dissuade from trying because they are "serious" runners so they only wear asics or brooks (the 2130 or the adrenaline of course). marketing and brand image seems to be the name of the game.

I think what Under Armour is doing is brilliant. They've got a simple product line that they're marketing to two completely different groups: "real" runners and "casual" runners. Most running brands out there are marketed to one or the other. GT-2XXX series: real runners. Nike Shox: casual runners. Brooks and Saucony: real runners. Adidas Bounce: casual runners. UA is going after both groups in a big way. The only time I've seen such a big rollout in both running specialty and big box type stores is when Nike brings out a "statement" shoe. If the product isn't total crap, UA is ready to play with the big boys.

Think of it this way: every athlete, whether he or she is a runner, basketball player, swimmer, golfer, etc., has at least one pair of running shoes in the closet. Most nonrunners do not know Brooks or Saucony. But they know Under Armour. UA is using their brand recognition to make sure that their shoes appear in as many of those closets as possible.

Finally, the football players at my high school will have something to run in besides basketball shoes come outdoor season...

this is long overdue. now our shoes, like our shirts, can ride up and still overheat.

They need to make some track spikes so I can go "click clack."

not (Impressed), so what department do you work for at UA. One, the GT-2130's-40's can be bought at just about any store that sells shoes. They reach the casual runner and real runner. Two, brooks and Saucony are well known and have a solid foundation in the market. UA is great at marketing but you don't bring something out in the specialty market unless you have a winning shoe. I hope they don't have a high arch with a tight feel because the average american has a medium foot with a medium arch. The assumption that they are for football, basketball and baseball athletes means they should be in dick's and sports authority. "not in our specialty stores"

Overall wrong timing do to economy and correct strategy on market but wrong push in which, stores to have them in. The individuals that shops at specialty will chew them up and spit them out giving the people on this sight a bad impression of UA.

best of luck