We’re going to see a ton of Nike spikes at the Olympic Trials. Brooks says its runners can wear other company's spikes

flvmmox wrote:

Trackfan55 wrote:

The athlete special is going to run so fast now, holy sh1t

spesh in dragonflies vs centro, 800m

who wins?

Spencer has a faster seasons best in some crappy Brooks spikes. Centro is DONE

Charlesvdw wrote:

The average spectator will recognize the Brooks logo on the shirt and assume that the entire racing attire is Brooks.

This.

And then maybe buy some apparel / casual wear.

Selling (racing) shoes is not the marketing goal. Those times are long gone.

This board is silly. Companies don’t rent out a billboard because they are trying to sell billboards. The reason athletes wear the product is to SHOW THE BRAND.

Brooks has just rented a billboard to advertise Nike. I think that is a poor decision.

Look at it this way. If the Beasts fail to make the Olympic team maybe people will think Nike spikes weren't that great and the Brooks ones are just fine.

Pletan wrote:

I think people are overestimating the optics of racing in a spike from a different company. Brooks will still be able to market their athletes that run well by saying they train in Brooks shoes. On will still be able to market their shoes because their successful athletes train in On.

If I'm inspired to buy a shoe because an athlete runs well, I'm not buying spikes. I don't race on the track. The majority of their marketing audience likely never steps foot on a track. I'm looking at what that inspiring and marketable athlete trains in, because I want to train in it too.

Good decision by both brands.

This is pretty spot on. I remember Bob Kennedy mentioning in an interview that he'd rather have Zoom Kennedy shoes over Zoom Kennedy spikes because shoes sell in much higher volumes, and his returns would've been significantly higher.

Another Dime for the Cursed Jar wrote:

Because said companies make crap and know they are putting their athletes at a disadvantage. An athlete placing well, even in blacked out spikes, is better than all their athletes not doing well due to their crappy product.

A little unusual to see Nike employees using registered names. So often, comically transparent rando names are here trying to sell shoes. So, about the 'crappy' products sold by all but Nike. That's the same adjective you guys used post-2017 when referring to all shoes other than the Vaporfly designed to run on pavement. So, what you are saying (bear with my lack of knowledge of your shoes - I'm vaguely remembering names I've read here on the Board) is:

All shoes made by Nike intended for the road prior to the Vaporfly 4% are crappy. The Zoom Streak LT (this name might not be exact but is close to a much hyped shoe from 2016 and earlier)is absolutely, firmly in this category as are your competitors' very similar shoes.

All track spikes made by Nike prior to the Dragonfly are crappy. This includes the 'Vic' that excited high schoolers across the country if every brand's analog to that shoe is crappy.

By saying everything is crappy except the latest Nike models, you are saying all other Nikes are crappy. This makes sense since all the road shoes you made prior to the Vaporfly and all the track spikes you made prior to the Dragonfly are extremely similar to many shoes made by various Nike competitors and we know all those shoes are crappy. Nike is, in fact, the biggest seller of crappy shoes. Again, crappy shoes include all currently sold shoes other than VF Next%, Alphafly, and Dragonfly. Nike is the largest purveyor of such shoes - crappy shoes.

Tea Bone wrote:

This board is silly. Companies don’t rent out a billboard because they are trying to sell billboards. The reason athletes wear the product is to SHOW THE BRAND.

Brooks has just rented a billboard to advertise Nike. I think that is a poor decision.

On topic:

I agree 100% with this post. The existence of the OAC shows what a well-coached group of upcoming stars can do racing and training (there are no cameras around and, let's face it, does anybody literally train in On) in Nike. Great investment for On. We will pay you if you promise not to wear our shoes!

Everyone’s gonna be in cheater shoes!? Wahoo! Watch the oly records fall. Actually, they’ll probably just jog around for most the race and turn it into a 400. Either way, Nike’s gonna rake it in. Probably working on a basketball shoe that makes you jump higher as we speak.

It is astounding to me that other companies allowed this happen AGAIN. This is the exact scenario that happened at the marathon trials and yet, even with a full extra year to fast-track their own super spikes, other companies just haven't come up with the goods. I understand that for most people it really won't be much of an endorsement for Nike but for those paying attention it is probably the biggest endorsement possible. It's also a little sad that all of these other companies have marketed pioneering technology for years and now they have to admit that Nike has them utterly beaten. The only move for Nike now is to release whiteout/blackout colorways of the Air Zoom Vics and Dragonflies and offer them to racers at the trials like they did the Alphaflys.

This reminds me of what my college coach told us. If you are going to run the workout different than intended you better race well.

Stepping out has consequences.

If you wear someone else’s shoes you better be an Olympian. Otherwise you failed twice. That’s a lot of pressure on the coach the marketing department and the athlete.

This shows total weakness, not strength, on the part of Brooks and On. Make no mistake about this. Brooks, you are a shoe company. You are not a running team.

As to Rojo’s argument, he’s wrong. This will have the reverse consequence. Upcoming athletes looking to sign pro deals won’t take Brooks or On seriously. This is the big leagues. If you make an inferior product, why even consider it?

I applaud adidas and ASICS for holding the line. Doesn’t seem to be hurting their athletes too much. A couple of indoor world records this winter (adidas), some road victories, and their track stars are doing great.

What an unforced error for Brooks and On. They’re done. They have just admitted that they are a second rate brand that can’t keep up. And it’s not like they couldn’t have seen this coming since 2016.

Which Brooks American Track athletes are projected to make the Olympic Team?

My point is that if you don’t make the team then your only purpose at the Olympic Trials is to push the brand.

This is a huge misstep that will hurt Brooks in the legitimacy department at the pro level for many years.

Hold on now.... wrote:

Tea Bone wrote:

This board is silly. Companies don’t rent out a billboard because they are trying to sell billboards. The reason athletes wear the product is to SHOW THE BRAND.

Brooks has just rented a billboard to advertise Nike. I think that is a poor decision.

On topic:

I agree 100% with this post. The existence of the OAC shows what a well-coached group of upcoming stars can do racing and training (there are no cameras around and, let's face it, does anybody literally train in On) in Nike. Great investment for On. We will pay you if you promise not to wear our shoes!

They actually do train in ON shoes. Go look at Joe Kleckers strava he posts pictures from workouts often where they are training in ON shoes

And New Balance!

Its the runner, not the shoe.

Only a tiny percentage of their total overall miles are going to be run in a spike, if they actually choose to not wear a Brooks spike.

They are running almost all of their miles in Brooks shoes. being coached by a Brooks coach, training, racing and living in Brooks clothing, living life as part of the Brooks team of athletes, accepting support as a Brooks sponsored athlete.

Just about everyone will view and consider them as part of the Brooks Team.

Same situation for On.

And Brooks has stated that its new spikes are just not ready yet, so its not like they are not trying.

I am sure On will be developing new spikes also.

Thanks to those companies for stepping up and supporting the sport by sponsoring pro runners.

Should we hold Nike directly responsible for dopers like Marion Jones, Lance Armstrong, Mark Mcguire and questionable coaches like Al Salazar?

Its the person not the kit.

Athletes that cash checks from shoe companies should compete in said shoes. It’s that simple. If they don’t, the athletes just look like hypocrites for endorsing the brand and the company just comes off as pathetic.

And you can absolutely be certain the shoe marketing “wizards” at Brooks and On are following this thread.

The only athletes in a tough spot here are college athletes that are handcuffed to a shoe deal they have no say in. College athletes should make the switch to the super spikes. They run for their University, not a shoe company.

New Balance and Asics have competitive spikes. Adidas? Hard to tell since the NAU guys looked to be wearing Nike.

I do not understand how the other companies could drop the ball. People were running in Dragonfly’s at the 2019 World Championships. Probably earlier. Sheesh. I know the money is made on Brooks Ghosts, but if you are going to sponsor pro athletes, make a suitable shoe.

Everyone here saying this is bad for Brooks is so old and out of touch. Would you rather your athlete not make the Olympics at all, or make it in someone else spikes that are painted over? Easy, you would rather them make it. They train in brooks every day. The average hobby jogger/Brooks enthusiast doesn't care that some Brooks Beast isn't racing in the Brooks spike. They're just going to buy a pair of Ghots because Mildred from their walking club says they're the best shoes shes ever had.

Grow up, it doesn't matter. Brooks doesn't even have a spike to compete with Nike. They're not losing money on this. Only losing money because they don't have to carbon plated spike to compete with Nikes.

These shoe companies don’t make money off of selling spikes anyways. If I were Brook’s, ASICS, Saucony, etc. I would save the money and just have a cheap high school level spike, and then let the elites wear a blacked out version of the competitor high level spike. It just isn’t worth the investment into trying to match the R and D of Nike, just to produce a sub par spike that no one will want to buy anyways.