Discussion-Where-Have-all-the-Signatures-Gone

In this day and age, are signature athletes few and far between?

Signature sneakers just don’t seem to have the same impact as they once did back in the 90’s. Some of the most popular signature series at this point in time are from those who are now retired. The Air Jordan, Air Penny & Reebok Question just to name a few, are still some of the most popular sneakers put back onto the market as retro releases.

Don’t get me wrong, we have some great signature lines right now with Derrick Rose, Kobe Bryant and Lebron James at the helm. Yet, there seems to be more PE’s rather than signatures. Not sure why that is exactly, it almost makes it seem as if the talent level of today’s players aren’t up to par with athletes of the past.

Growing up I remember every brand having at least two or three great players from almost every sport carry a signature line. That isn’t the case today and some players who would typically never have a signature shoe end up taking their talents to overseas brands such as PEAK and Li-Ning.

This year’s NBA Champions had one signature athlete on the roster, if I’m not mistaken, who’s signature line is with PEAK. Out of all the great player on the Mavericks, Jason Kidd is the only one, to my recollection, with a signature sneaker… and we cant even purchase his signature unless we head to eBay. Even if his signature shoes were readily available, I’m not so sure it would even sell well in the States.

As stated above, Player Exclusives and Team shoes seem to be where most brands are headed with their performance lines. It makes you wonder if the reason behind the change of pace is due to more and more players becoming less marketable, possibly not having the talent level needed to carry a signature line of their own or maybe its just more profitable for brands to do away with hefty contracts and go back to basics.

Do you feel that there are players in sports today that can and should carry their own signature line that currently do not; if so, who would you like to see have their own signature sneaker? Better yet, are the current signature lines as appealing as the retired athletes that seem to continue to receive more releases on the shoes worn during the glory days than athletes currently dominating their respective sport?

Image Via Sole Collector

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

16 Comments

  1. Most signature shoes don't sell. it's cheaper for Nike and Adidas to customize an existing sneaker template for a player exclusive than it is to commit to a full production line of a shoe that won't generate a profit. That's why Adidas ditched all their signature shoes in favor of one team edition with PE accents a couple years ago. The sigs were great looking, especially the Vegas All Star editions, but no one bought them so Adidas lost a lot of money. Star players don't always equal star sales. It doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.

    Reply

  2. The 90's where the best of time for sneakers I remember gettin air jordan's on wednesday..lol I would have to skip first period to get my kicks and I still rock them to school that day.. Killing everybody..

    Reply

  3. The 90s had the best sneakers to come out. There is plenty of talent in the NBA now. The designs from the 90s were the best that is the reason i've been lookin for ogs foamposite max, jordans, and other Nikes. The shoes nowadays are just for the court. Not like the older shoes cuz u can rock dem out and play ball with them also.

    Reply

    1. I agree with you. The reason why the shoes aren't marketable is because they only appeal to people who actually play bball on court. Fans and people like me who do not actively play basketball, the sneakers have no mass appeal. A great example is the Kobe lines and Lebron Lines. some of the sneakers in those lines have proven to look good on and off the court which in turn caused alot of sells

      Reply

  4. The reason sig lines are not prominent is because experimentation is out, accept for the Adidas JS (and those are a bit extreme). In the late 80s Nike was dominant, but a kid wasn't corny if he rocked a pair of Filas, Adidas, LeCoq Sportif, Diadoras, Ellesse and Brooks (on court) and wouldn't get laughed at. Now, kids don't have individual flavor and don't tend to set their own trends. They follow trends. You can't resell things that people won't buy, so people will only promote and ride with the most dominant sneaker and we all know who that is. The only place you have different shoes is in the runner's market where people pay more for shoes than any sneakerhead does. In the running category you have more new shoes and companies popping up and the market is thriving while the basketball sneaker market is pretty much routine.

    Reply

  5. Jason Kidd’s signature shoe is decent I actually wanted to buy some a couple months ago frm PYS buh I didn’t feel it was that serious….n I kinda think u hit the nail on the head…..the players that have a signature shoe now are the ones who I feel that stick out in there league….Rose, James, and Bryant are PHENOMINAL players and to majority kids those are the 3 who children tend to gravitate towards so instead of taking a risk giving a B± player their own individual sneaker line they rather stick to majority fan favorites wit signature lines and give the rest of the B list players P.E. its cheaper for them and it makes the shore more appealing and rare …

    Reply

  6. That was the great thing about that period from the late 80's until the mid '90's. Even guys who weren't huge stars had signature models which performed well on the court and looked great off of it. I wish Nike and the other brands would go back to designing sig models for players and just do smaller production runs instead of massive runs of generic performance models which nobody buys. Nike's new models are excellent on the court but don't work as a casual everyday shoe. Asking somebody to pay $125.00 + for a shoe they can only wear on the court but can't rock in class is a bit much. If you can only afford one pair of shoes you want something that is functional and stylish.

    Reply

  7. The 90s had not only the best sneakers but also the best athletes… Football, Basketball, Baseball had tons of good players… today u have only a few. Another reason is the design and style of todays bb sneakers. U cannot wear them under a pair of jeans… How do Adidas Zero or Nike Hyperfuse look under jeans… Garbage…
    Look at the sneakers from Deion Sanders, Barry Sanders, Scottie Pippen, Michael Jordan and and and… U cannot even compare them to Kobes or Lebrons…

    Reply

  8. The TRUTH is that teh Modern Athlete lacks personality and start power like the ones from teh 90's did. Pippen, Jordan, Shaq, Vince, Garnett, Sanders, Kemp, Barkley had personalities beyond the court and field. AND teh market was saturated with GRs too.
    The Real reason Adidas pulled out is that they lack the creative marketing to compete with Nike. Reebok's last hope was Iverson and they got worst over the years until teh last 3 sigs were $70 and sold double wood.
    Nike knows its #1 and refuses to play second to anyone! So they sign teh top athlete in every sport and assign departments to not only make the shoes, but teh gear and the personas of the entire design life of teh product.
    Tennis = Willaims, Federer, Nadal
    Golf = Tiger Woods
    Bball = Everyboy worth mentioning, including Jordan athletes
    Football = over 40% players wear teh brand
    Soccer = Ronaldinho
    BUT Nike can do more than Kobe & Durant. They need to get more young talent and launch a few new lines!

    Reply

  9. I am not an adidas guy. Strictly a swoosh guy. That said the kobe line is great n lebron line is fine
    Is good if u like a heavier shoe. Durant line is decent at least the kdii.the hyperfuse is a cool shoe like
    Hyperdunk

    Reply

  10. Look, I think this questioned was posed with Rose tinted glasses. There weren't that many people with Sigs back in the day. I'd warrant the numbers are pretty much in line with today's even. Bottom line: You have to dominate and have charisma to have a sig. Everyone in today's game that dominates with charisma has a sig. It's that simple. KD, KB24, LBJ, DWADE. We've even got scrubs with their own sig, like Brandon Jennings. Derrik Rose got his Sig, Carmelo Anthony got his sig. And like I said, people with no business haven Sigs, like Ron Ar, I mean, Mette World Peace. Nothin has changed since the 90's except the shoes get wacker and look more like space boots then anything else. When are they going to re-release my Robinson pumps or a sick pair of Air Ups? Or the original high top delta force with the baby blue……..?

    Reply

  11. Give it time… D-Rose, LeBrons, Kobes, Durants, they'll get their chance.
    In the 90's, we had Barkleys, Pippens, Jordans, Magics, Birds, David Robinsons, Nike Garnetts, Nike Duncans, Nike Pennys, Reebok Shaqs, etc… The 90's had better players.

    Reply

  12. I'm not feeling the new signature lines of today's athletes. The designs of the 1990's was so innovative that it will be hard to duplicate. Remember the Bo Jackson's, the Andre Agassi's, those were some of the best designs ever. Why do you think they are slamming us with Retro's as we speak? The public knows this, and the CEO of Nike knows this too. Air Max 90 "Infrared" anyone? Look at all the Foamposite 1 Colorways of recent release and the ones on the way. They're making $$$$ off the Retros.

    Reply

  13. I believe Blake Griffin could Market a sneaker…
    You can't really say much about shoe culture & signature shoes of 2day compared to tha "yesterdecade" because the economy is down, people don't want to spend along on "sigs" & not knowing how they hold up, Jordans, Foams, Barkleys, & Answers, hold up well over the years, & we didnt really have time to test out a "Peak" or "Li-Ning"…

    Reply

  14. i think the improved technology has a lot to do with it. hard for a sleek lightweight modern shoe to look good as a casual shoe. they're better on the court now but the result of that may be that the era of stylish performance kicks is over. nobody gonna be looking for an adirose retro ten years from now, or even kobe v for that matter.

    Reply

  15. If I may contribute with my two cents…designwise, shoes are not as good looking as they used to be. Shoes nowadays have no differentiation, and certainly look dull. I used to be amazed as how different were a pair of Air Unlimiteds to the Air Uptempos, and yet be worthy of my longings. Now you see a pair of Hyperdunks, Fly Bys, or even the Le Brons, and it's A Swoosh, a VERY high top, and some poorly vis air. It's like they were made by bored soldiers. And on top of that, they now want to charge you USD 130+ for ugly shoes?

    Same case with JB…I don't know if many people agree here, but since AJ 12-13's the designs have only became uglier by the season. Just look at AJ 2010, or the Melos…awful combat boots if you ask me, also with HUGE price tags…I those shoes were on the market when I was in HS, I guess I would have gone Kevin Arnold on my sneakers and rocked red high chuck taylors, that, if you ask me, are not that bad after all.

    How many sneakerheads agree with me on this one?

    Reply