5 Ugly Nike Shoes that We Should Just Forget About


Nike has been well-known for producing some of the most iconic and memorable shoes in the past. The Nike Air Max, Nike Air Jordan, and Nike SB to name a few are just some of the brand's best when it comes to sneakers. However, during the half century that the brand has been making shoes, there are those that are not so noteworthy in terms of aesthetic. Here's a list of the ugliest Nike shoes that history should just forget about.

Nike Total Air Foamposite Max

This Nike shoe has everything you need in a basketball shoe with all the Nike technologies such as a foam midsole and Nike Zoom unit for cushioning. It is a functional basketball but it resembles more of a building block rather than an actual basketball shoe. Released in 1998, Nike was experimenting a lot with the designs and this is one of those "futuristic" ones they came up with. Let's just hope the future of shoe design is better than that.

Nike Flightposite 3

Like the first Nike shoe in our entry, the Nike Flightposite 3 is another brick in the wall of Nike's worst shoes in terms of aesthetic. The design is supposed to be futuristic (like what most Nike shoes in this era failed at doing) but it just came out as awful, plus the pods or those little circles at the side serve neither function nor style. Whatever Nike saw in the future, it ain't good.

Nike Air Jordan Melo 5.5

When Nike came out with this shoe, we can't help but ask who's crazier; the team that created the shoe design or the people that approved it. It is surprising that you'd find a few Air Jordan's on this list, considering the fact that Air Jordans been nothing but iconic. This Air Jordan, on the other hand, is something history should just forget about. The things that you see on the sides are not prints but eyelets - you know? The holes where the shoelaces should go? It's absurd and without function, this shoe should never see the light of day.

Air Jordan XVII

While a lot of people would say that this shoe was ahead of its time, the Air Jordan XVII was the first shoe to ever hit the $200 mark. The shoe itself looks amazing but not amazing enough to cost $200. At that time, Foot Locker - perhaps one of the biggest shoe distributors and an authority on sneakers, refused to sell shoes that are over $120. Aside from its steep price point, it also has many unnecessary features that consumers just don't need.

Nike Air Footscape Woven Motion in Animal Print

Animal prints have been in and out of fashion for quite some time mainly because it is hard to wear and are at some point ugly, and this Nike shoe is no exception. It looks great from the side but from the top, it's a different story.

The woven details on the side that goes all the way to the front just don't make sense but there is a possibility that it could work. It's quirky enough to be a couture, Harajuku-type of footwear, but ugly for everyday wear because it is mainly hard to pair with other accents of your outfit.

Nike has been gracious when it comes to providing us with top-notch and iconic footwear throughout the ages but they are not perfect. For Nike, the good definitely outnumbers the bad, and we are thankful for it. While we do not recommend that you get the shoes above, the ones below are some of the Nike shoes that you should have on your shoe rack.

User Comments