Ugly Footwear Manifesto: Cataloging the Most Egregious Numbered Adidas Shoes

Adidas, a renowned sports brand, has been a leader in the athletic footwear industry for decades. Throughout its history, Adidas has created some iconic and aesthetically pleasing shoes that have taken the world by storm. However, alongside these successes, there have been a fair share of missteps in their design department. This manifesto aims to catalog the most egregious numbered Adidas shoes, those that have received unanimous criticism for their lackluster design and sometimes perplexing style choices.

1. Adidas Originals ZX Flux (Model: D67787)
– Q: Why is this shoe considered ugly?
A: The shoe features an all-over photographic print of multi-colored prescription pills, which many find distasteful and inappropriate.

2. Adidas F50 Adizero (Model: G25961)
– Q: What makes this shoe visually unappealing?
A: The shoe’s upper is covered in a bright lime green snake pattern, making it look garish and outlandish on the soccer field.

3. Adidas Yeezy Boost 380 (Model: FZ4981)
– Q: What sets this shoe apart in terms of design?
A: This shoe has been criticized for its bulbous shape and strange web-like patterns that resemble a spider’s web, making it unattractive to many.

4. Adidas NMD_R1 STLT Primeknit (Model: CQ2389)
– Q: Why is this shoe considered ugly?
A: The shoe’s mélange knit upper is designed with a combination of colors that clash and create a visually overwhelming effect.

5. Adidas T-Mac 1 (Model: 666665)
– Q: What makes this shoe stand out in terms of ugliness?
A: The shoe’s busy design, with a mix of multiple patterns and colors, creates a chaotic visual aesthetic that is widely disliked.

6. Adidas Pro Spark Low (Model: F36429)
– Q: Why is this shoe considered unappealing?
A: The shoe’s oversized tongue, coupled with an obnoxious combination of neon green and black colors, renders it undesirable to many.

7. Adidas Tubular Doom (Model: AQ2550)
– Q: What sets this shoe apart in terms of design?
A: The shoe’s bulky silhouette and the use of an unflattering combination of shades of gray make it visually unappealing to most.

8. Adidas Kamanda (Model: CQ2221)
– Q: What makes this shoe stand out in terms of ugliness?
A: The shoe’s odd serrated outsole design and soccer-inspired aesthetics, combined with a lack of cohesion in color choices, result in an unattractive shoe.

9. Adidas Harden Vol. 2 (Model: AQ0026)
– Q: Why is this shoe considered ugly?
A: The shoe’s excessive use of seams and visible stitching, along with its unconventional color combinations, detract from its overall appeal.

10. Adidas EQT Support ADV Winter (Model: BZ0640)
– Q: What sets this shoe apart in terms of design?
A: The shoe’s bulky shape, combined with an oversized winterized tongue and an unflattering color palette, makes it unattractive to many.

11. Adidas Crazy 1 ADV (Model: AQ0320)
– Q: Why is this shoe visually unappealing?
A: The shoe’s exaggerated midsole design, coupled with an eclectic mix of materials and colors, creates an unattractive shoe.

12. Adidas Tubular Shadow (Model: BB8820)
– Q: What makes this shoe stand out in terms of ugliness?
A: The shoe’s unconventional upper design, with three-dimensional patterns and textures, results in an unattractive aesthetic.

13. Adidas Climacool Vento (Model: FW7814)
– Q: Why is this shoe considered ugly?
A: The shoe’s lack of unity in design elements, including the combination of overly bright colors and disjointed patterns, makes it visually unappealing.

14. Adidas Prophere (Model: CQ2542)
– Q: What sets this shoe apart in terms of design?
A: The shoe’s bulky silhouette, paired with an unusual combination of materials and colors, renders it unattractive to many.

15. Adidas Pulseboost HD (Model: EF6620)
– Q: Why is this shoe visually unappealing?
A: The shoe’s strikingly large Boost midsole and disjointed upper design, with a mix of patterns and textures, detract from its overall attractiveness.

16. Adidas Futurecraft 4D (Model: FV5322)
– Q: What makes this shoe stand out in terms of ugliness?
A: The shoe’s lattice-like midsole design, paired with an unconventional upper, creates a futuristic yet polarizing aesthetic that is divisive among consumers.

17. Adidas Pro Vision (Model: EE5714)
– Q: Why is this shoe considered ugly?
A: The shoe’s combination of jarring colors, unusual patterns, and an oversized tongue make it unattractive to many.

18. Adidas Sobakov (Model: BB7614)
– Q: What sets this shoe apart in terms of design?
A: The shoe’s overtly exaggerated gumsole, paired with an asymmetric lacing system and unique upper design, makes it visually unattractive to most.

19. Adidas LXCON (Model: EE5896)
– Q: Why is this shoe visually unappealing?
A: The shoe’s bulky and chunky silhouette, with a mix of exaggerated elements and mismatched colors, detracts from its overall aesthetic appeal.

20. Adidas Spezial Trainer (Model: B41823)
– Q: What makes this shoe stand out in terms of ugliness?
A: The shoe’s outdated design, coupled with unsightly color choices and a peculiar stripe pattern on the sides, renders it unattractive to many.

While Adidas has undoubtedly produced some remarkable shoe designs, they have also faced criticism over the years for certain models that missed the mark. Such shoes, showcased in this manifesto, exhibit a range of unappealing design choices. However, it is essential to remember that beauty is subjective, and what one person may consider ugly, another might find intriguing or even fashionable.