Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've had a pair of these for a while, except they were suede black not suede maroon. I'm short and I'm not a baller I feel ridiculous wearing these with everything, so today, I went out and bought some shoes.
I just bought these. I have a tendency to like things initially and then regret them, like the above Filas. Myself, I'm a minimalist, anti "hollister across the chest" kind of stuff, and even the S of a Skechers shoe irritates me. Any thoughts on these shoes?
It would really help if you could also classify these as casual shoes, walking, or running or whatever. Rack's site says it's an "oxford shoe" whatever that is. So far, I can tell that flexing my foot upwards isn't that comfortable because the flap is a bit stiff.
So I might have to keep the Fila's for the gym.
----
Also, I felt like a clown with my current flip flops, them being a bit oversized, and my feet staining them black, on a tan surface
I love the second shoe, and I'm really trying to get my man to wear flip flops. However, I did convince him to wear shoes of the second picture variety, and he now loves them. I think they look very chic for men yet unstuffy. Personally, I hate the first shoe. But that's just my opinion!
I don't care for the first shoe at all. Too..."fat", or something. 2nd shoe is fairly stylish right now...know many people that wear this style. Flip flops are pretty standard stuff.
I like the second shoe. It's a nice casual shoe. Flip flops aren't always appropriate. Actually, IMHO they're usually not appropriate if not at a BBQ or the beach. The second shoe is also better than a running shoe when you want to look casual but not too sporty. A great weekend shoe.
The second shoe, meaning the brown leather (or pleather?) athletic oxford (there you have it) reminds me of Campers...have that bowling shoe quality, which I usually like. Some of the details on yours are not my style, but I can see wearing them with jeans or khakis...it's a good, casual shoe for when you don't want to (or can't) wear sneakers.
The first pair - the high-tops (which look like running shoes or maybe walkers)...serve a purpose but...well...keep 'em for utilitarian use if they're comfortable. Sometimes function is more important than fashion.
The first one is just ugly. It looks like an bad orthopedic shoe. The second one seems kinda dated.
Why not get something non-descript and classic like:
Bostonian Cushing (Antique Brown Leather) - Lace-Up/Oxford (http://www.zappos.com/n/p/dp/30670294/c/30.html - broken link)
The CAMPER shoes look so minimalist that in my eyes, they bring attention to yourself. I like to blend in not stand out. The BLAST shoes are somewhat in between a plain shoe like the classic converses, versus a busy running Nike shoe. That's just me.
The Bostonian and ECCO look like something I could add to my portfolio once I start making bank, but for now, I'm trying to get something that looks good with shorts and pants, not too pretentious, and gym-able.
You should get different shoes for the gym. I always find good gym shoes on clearance in person. There should be some back to school sales and summer clearance going on around.
Cheap slip on looks nice with short: (casual pants)
Draven Garth Slip-on at Zappos.com (http://www.zappos.com/product/7292204/color/18 - broken link)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.