KYW Monthly Mailbag 📥 — The mixed bag with Caitlin Clark
Thoughts on Caitlin Clark's Nike deal, fading signature sneaker lines and more
Goooood morning, family! Welcome back to the Kicks You Wear. Missed y’all dearly. Thank you so much for rocking with me this morning. I appreciate you.
It’s mailbag time! My favorite. Before we dive in though:
In my cart 🛒: These icy GT-2160s are going to drive me insane. I have so many pairs that look similar to this. Yet, something is compelling me to grab another…
On my radar 👀: The GR run of the New Balance 1000 is so good but my size (11.5) is sold out everywhere. No idea when I’ll get this shoe, but I’m going to get it. If you see these around, holla at yerboi.
Are y’all all eyeing anything these days? Let me know what’s on your radar! Sound off in the comment section.
Alright, let’s clear out some mail.
I'd love to hear more about Caitlin Clark’s new Nike deal!
Everybody has an opinion on Caitlin Clark these days—some fair, many unfair. I hesitate to throw mine in the ring because of how much of a lightning rod she’s already become.
My take is a simple one. I kind of just appreciate the doors she’s opening for women’s basketball. I'll explain that in a second, though. First, let’s talk about the deal.
The details: Clark signed an eight-year deal with the Swoosh that was reportedly worth $28 million, according to the Wall Street Journal. The deal will see Clark earn $3.5 million annually from the Swoosh and include a signature shoe.
Here’s a look at the money she didn’t take:
Adidas reportedly offered Clark a 4-year, $6 million deal.
Under Armour had a deal reportedly worth $16 million over 4-years
Puma was going to make an offer but reportedly bowed out once it realized the asking price was over $3 million annually.
That’s how into Caitlin Clark all these brands were. The going rate was $3 million annually. In the end, Nike made the most sense. The deal reportedly had the most security with 8 years. Plus, she had a history there after her NIL deal at Iowa.
Zoom out: Nike went a long time without having a female signature athlete.
Before 2022, when Elenea Delle Donne’s signature model dropped (with no promotion, by the way), Diana Taurasi’s Shox DT was the last shoe to drop, which was back in 2006.
That’s a 16-year gap, folks. That’s why seeing this brand attach itself to Caitlin Clark for the long haul is a big deal. We haven’t seen this sort of commitment to a female athlete in a long time and she hasn’t even played a minute yet.
The other side: While it’s a huge deal, is it entirely fair? From a certain perspective, the answer is no.
Some people (including myself, to be transparent) were frustrated when this news broke. As a fan of the WNBA and many of its players, it’s frustrating that Clark is getting these opportunities when there have been plenty of opportunities to do this prior to this moment.
Let me bring up the elephant in the room. The name that always comes up is A’ja Wilson.
We don’t deserve A’ja. She’s one of the brightest personalities in sports today. She’s a brilliant basketball mind with lots of hardware to show for it, too. She’s got everything you could want in a signature athlete. Yet, here we are.
I’ve spoken with multiple sources at Nike about this. I’ve repeatedly been told “it’s coming.” When I press for a date, I can never get one. I’m only told it’s in development.
That’s not good enough anymore. It’s beyond disappointing. And it does feel like Clark is skipping the line a bit here. It felt the same when Sabrina Ionescu’s signature model dropped. Now, it’s happening again. It’s not a good look.
That’s especially true considering that the only three female signature athletes on Nike’s roster are white women playing in a league that is 70% Black.
But here's the thing: As frustrating as it is, I think we have to look beyond that here. We must remember that the footwear business is not a meritocracy.
This isn’t me saying that Wilson, or anyone else, doesn’t deserve the sort of love and adulation Clark is getting. I think they do. But the fact of the matter is that nobody has quite moved the needle like Clark has yet. Nike sees that. They see the numbers. That’s why she got the deal she got. That’s why the shoe is coming.
The big picture: That’s a good thing. She’s the rising tide raises all ships no matter how you feel about her. Investment in Clark is an investment in women’s spots. That’s what we’ve been asking for.
I just look at the deals that Clark didn’t get and think to myself, “Oh, there’s Paige Bueckers’ deal next year right there.” I say, “That’s Juju Watkin’s money in 2026.” And I hope that when the brands see how hard we go for Caitlin, they realize how late to the party they are.
The AE1s, Sabrina 1s, and Caitlin's upcoming signature plus word of the AE2 in the not-too-distant future got me thinking…
The reader continues… How many recent signature lines get started with some hype that fades as soon as the second shoe is introduced and that momentum is never re-captured, and should we be concerned that sneaker companies aren't up to consistently supporting the young stars they sign to signature deals with pairs that match (or surpass) their stardom?
It does feel like that second signature model comes with a bit of dropoff, doesn’t it? The reader pointed out a bunch of names with this problem. Paul George, Steph Curry, James Harden, Trae Young, Giannis Antetokounmpo.
Not only do sales numbers seem to dip, but the overall enthusiasm for some of those sneakers just doesn’t seem to be there as much.
The why: Honestly, I think we didn’t care enough about them. Between the Yeezy run in the mid-2010s and the retro run to star this decade, we just didn’t have room for signature shoes. Brands sure didn’t care either. They were more concerned about using their athletes as billboards for their next hyped product.
But the biggest problem, in my estimation, is that the rosters we’re looking at have become too stacked.
Nike basketball’s most recent boom was in the late 2000s and early 2010s. The brand focused on three athletes: LeBron James, Kobe Bryant and Kevin Durant.
With the addition of Clark's upcoming model, the brand is up to eight. If we eventually get an A’ja signature, it’ll be nine.
That’s a lot of athletes. And it’s not just Nike. You can look at Adidas’ roster or Jordan Brand’s, too. There are a lot of names included. The market is just oversaturated. It’s hard to make something interesting and unique just once. But then, when you have to do it annually? That’s when the waters get muddled a ton.
What that means: Should we be concerned about what’s coming next for this new crop of athletes? Maybe so. These stacked rosters aren’t going away.
I will say the positive vibes from Adidas hoops and Puma do give me hope. But I just think everybody needs to slow things down and stop doing so much. Just give us something good and let us sit with it. We’ll be okay.
During WrestleMania week, we saw a partnership with Roman Reigns from the WWE and Jordan Brand…
The reader continues… Obviously a signature shoe is different than being a Jordan athlete, but how would you see a Roman Reigns signature selling? It would be the first-of-its kind for wrestling, and we know with the merger with TKO and Endeavor that WWE isn't shying away from more and more mainstream attention.
This is such a fun thought exercise. On one hand, I’m here for it. On the other, I think it could be kind of risky.
The backdrop: Roman Reigns (one of the brand’s biggest faces) just signed a deal with Jordan Brand ahead of Wrestlemania earlier this month. The deal initially surprised me. A Jordan Brand deal for a wrestler? That’s unusual.
But it adds up:
Reigns is one of the most popular wrestlers in the company, a fan-favorite heel, and one of the longest WWE title holders in the brand’s history.
The recent merger between WWE’s parent company, TKO, and Endeavor Holdings (which owns UFC) has the company branching out and looking to do business with other brands.
I think it could be a worthwhile investment for both sides.
On one hand: I think tapping in with Reigns — potentially with a signature model down the line? — gives Jordan Brand an asset that could have longevity. Reigns could transition into stardom like The Rock and John Cena have.
On the other hand: Achieving that sort of fame is anomalous and that’s what’s required for something like a signature shoe. I doubt things ever go quite that far with Reigns. He’s already 38 years old and Jordan Brand’s roster is filled with names that probably connect more on a wider scale than him already.
But, even if it never produces a sneaker, this overall connection is a good thing for WWE.
What is up with Nike limiting availability of its top line running shoe, the Alphafly 3?
The reader continues… They're obviously selling out on each of the limited releases, with seemingly low stock across the board and very little info about upcoming drops. Every other running brand makes its elite racing shoe readily available (minus the adidas Evo, of course) - what is up with the scarcity mindset for what is purely a performance shoe?
Nike’s recently released Alphafly 3 is the flagship for its running category. But the problem is you can’t buy it anywhere these days. Runners have been complaining about it since it was released.
The shoe’s release in January was as bad as some of the hyped Jordan models. They sold out in less than a minute.
Even now, months after, it’s hard to buy bigger sizes in these joints without going the resale route.
Here’s why: It’s super frustrating. But when we look at who this shoe is meant for, it makes sense that this keeps happening.
First, it’s a $285 shoe. Typically, Nike doesn’t produce many shoes at that price point because it knows most people aren’t buying them. They’re expensive.
Second, this shoe is meant for a small minority of runners. It’s designed specifically for distance runners. Most people don’t fit into that category. They’ll have other cheaper options they’ll turn to first.
Third, Nike just doesn’t like to see its products sitting on shelves. It’d rather make fewer models and have upset consumers than be embarrassed in that way.
Add all that together and that’s how you get a limited running sneaker. Is it the best strategy in the world? I don’t think so. Especially when you’ve got brands like Hoka, On and others breathing down your neck in the category.
Hopefully, we see a shift moving forward.
Do you think cities influence other cities? How do you think trends travel across the country from city to city?
The reader continues… For example I understand that Chicago could influence Detroit, but who does LA influence, for example does LA influece Vegas first, and Vegas influences Phoenix, and then the trend hits Houston. Is this even possible to measure?
The answer is unequivocally yes. Cities absolutely influence each other in a broader sense with fashion, whether we know it or not.
My personal example: New Balance is a huge trending brand now, obviously. But it wasn’t always that way everywhere…except in Washington, D.C.
New Balance has been a staple in the region since the 1980s when local hustlers around the way wore them while they did what they did on the block.
The sneakers became cool here. That “cool” has persisted for decades. NB is having its moment now and that influence has a lot to do with it.
It would never have been this way if that influence had stayed in Washington, though. It worked its way up 95 into Baltimore (who’d argue they did it first) and Philadelphia. It went regional first, then global.
That’s just one example. Just like you can trace New Balance’s roots to D.C., you can follow the Nike Cortez’s roots up and down the West Coast back to LA or Timberland’s roots across the East Coast to New York.
Behind the scenes: Brands measure this sort of thing through sales data and integrated marketing campaigns. Using New Balance as an example again, it’s based in Boston but knows the influence it holds in D.C. It’ll tap into it from time to time (but not often enough if you ask me).
The bottom line: Cities influence each other. We’re all connected. People move from place to place and the trends follow. That’s with clothes, food, dialect and so much more.
To me, this is what makes our world such a cool place to live in. We can see the best traces of ourselves within each other all the time. It’s dope, man. Thanks for this question.
What’s droppin’, bruh?
Travis Scott x Jordan Brand “Jumpman Jack TR” — Tuesday, April 30
Bode x Nike Astro Grabber SP — Wednesday, May 1
Kobe 8 “Mambacita” — Wednesday, May 1
New Balance MiUSA 993 “Chive” & “Dark Mercury” — Thursday, May 2
Air Jordan 4 “Industrial Blue” — Saturday, May 4
That’s a wrap, folks! I appreciate you giving me a bit of your time today. Thanks so much to those of you who submitted questions for today’s mailbag. You’re the best.
Let’s chat again on Friday. Until then, y’all. Peace and love. Be easy, be safe, be kind. We out.
-Sykes 💯
I've not bought a new pair in over two years, but I keep eyeing the AE1s. Seeing Ant do his thing in the playoffs is helping, and the All-Star and pinkish(?) colorways have stood out for me. I really shouldn't buy more shoes, but those are really tempting me.
Roman doesn't need a signature Jordan model any more than Aaron Judge does. The model for most Jordan signees is to have them wear existing/retro models on the field/court/ring, so that's what I would expect in WWE too.