Dig up, you fool!
Dafuq?!? Fuck off fail boi.
And learn to grammar while you probably fail to fully fuck off.
An infinite facepalm gif fails to have enough facepalm.
Guess when Adidas finally made its first cleat shoe for women athletes?
.
.
.
.
Not until this year:
uhhh…
Are you saying you don’t think that’s true?
Oh i’m sure its true, i just think its so ridiculous that they didn’t make cleats for women until this year that i don’t even know wtf is wrong with Adidas.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. And yes, I agree, it’s ridiculous!
I’m a little skeptical that this is anything but marketing. Adidas, Nike, etc. all made cleats for women before this and they seem to have worked just fine. I’m not sure what the difference is between this cleat, which certainly won’t be a universal fit for all women soccer players, and just trying on cleats until you find one that fits well. I have two kids who played soccer from grade school into college, and the process of buying new cleats is a lot of trial and error, often involving trying every cleat in the store and still not finding a match, then going to the next store to repeat the process. So these cleats probably fit Trinity Rodman perfectly, and there is a subset of women soccer players who will have these cleats fit them well, but the vast majority of women soccer players are still going to be trying on dozens of cleats to find a good fit.
If the intention is to raise awareness that women players have different needs in footwear, then that’s could be valuable, but there’s nothing in the article that indicates a real biomechanical difference in the design that is unique to women. The “narrower heel, higher arch, and fuller midfoot” are all just fitment characteristics, not fundamental differences.
Yeah, I’m dumbfounded as well. This means that the market for specific women’s soccer cleats were probably cornered by Nike and Puma, although it doesn’t mean that they were necessarily good.
I know that Adidas made women’s track spikes since at least the 70s (my first pair in 1978 was Adidas) and they made women’s Tennis shoes, too. What were they thinking leaving out soccer cleats?
(I know that when I played on a rec softball team in the 90s, I chose Puma because they were inexpensive vs a higher end brand like Nike.)
I had Puma cleats for soccer back in the late 1970’s, but now that I think about it, they were from the men’s department because that’s all that was available. But 2025? That’s unforgivable!
IDA does only women’s cleats specifically built for women and girls (rather than re-sized versions of the men’s). I think they’re getting successful now and the other shoe companies have realized there is money to be made in gear specifically designed for women.
ETA: I don’t know about fundamental differences between genders. But there might be something to it? There are differences in other parts of the body.
And yeah, a lot of it is fit. But maybe those women and girls would only have to try on a half dozen cleats to find a good fit instead of dozens if more cleats were made specifically for women. At the least, women athletes deserve at least as much research and development for their needs as men.
Gender differences in adult foot shape: implications for shoe design - PubMed.
Now she’s a Hockey Mom!
