7
7
0
See article below.
The Defense Department has issued a formal notice asking American manufacturers who want to make an athletic shoe for service members to come forward and be counted.
As individual as Soldiers feet, ankles, knees, stride, gait, etc - do we really want to mandate which shoes a Soldier can wear?
Is this uniformity for uniformity sake or is there a benefit?
The Defense Department has issued a formal notice asking American manufacturers who want to make an athletic shoe for service members to come forward and be counted.
Army
Shoes
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 61
1
1
0
My off-the-shelf clearance Nike's do the job just fine. Why over-complicate a shoe?
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This is no different than sticking every soldier in the same boot.
Why? Because everyone needs to be in uniform? Stupid. (Yes, everyone should be in uniform, but not at the safety and well being of your soldiers) UGh..
Well, you better be prepared to have even more soldiers hurt from sticking them all in the same shoe. Its foolish and a waste of time. Not to mention that if a soldier has to buy their shoes, why shouldnt they be able to pick what they want.
Yes, I know my brooks being neon pink may be a little flashy, but I have tried every other brand of shoe out there. The lower the price my feet tend to suffer, which tend to be all the decent looking ones.
Do we really need to worry about what our soldiers feet look like? Eh, NO! For Pete's Sake! Find something better to gripe and complain about than what soldiers are wearing on their feet.
A soldiers tennis shoes have no affect on their mission capability - UNLESS - They are the wrong dang shoe and are providing issues to the soldier.
Sure, you can issue me those dumb New Balance shoes (I call them dumb bc my feet dont like them, they may be great for others) but, give it 30days and I will have some awesome shin splits, pro-nation beyond all belief, arch issues and potential of stress fractures. I have been there, done that.
Dumbest idea. Ever.
Rant... Over
Why? Because everyone needs to be in uniform? Stupid. (Yes, everyone should be in uniform, but not at the safety and well being of your soldiers) UGh..
Well, you better be prepared to have even more soldiers hurt from sticking them all in the same shoe. Its foolish and a waste of time. Not to mention that if a soldier has to buy their shoes, why shouldnt they be able to pick what they want.
Yes, I know my brooks being neon pink may be a little flashy, but I have tried every other brand of shoe out there. The lower the price my feet tend to suffer, which tend to be all the decent looking ones.
Do we really need to worry about what our soldiers feet look like? Eh, NO! For Pete's Sake! Find something better to gripe and complain about than what soldiers are wearing on their feet.
A soldiers tennis shoes have no affect on their mission capability - UNLESS - They are the wrong dang shoe and are providing issues to the soldier.
Sure, you can issue me those dumb New Balance shoes (I call them dumb bc my feet dont like them, they may be great for others) but, give it 30days and I will have some awesome shin splits, pro-nation beyond all belief, arch issues and potential of stress fractures. I have been there, done that.
Dumbest idea. Ever.
Rant... Over
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
There's already a petition against this.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stop-dod-instituting-standard-issue-running-shoe-new-recruits/sKzP7xYx
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/stop-dod-instituting-standard-issue-running-shoe-new-recruits/sKzP7xYx
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
That's good. Seems like bit of an uphill climb right now. Usually takes a big story to get it going.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
CPT (Join to see) IF the Army is looking a going to one style of shoe only, Bad Decision. Put five people in the room and each could need a differnt style of shoe to compensate for proper fitting(i.e. high arches, low arches, flat feet, pronation and supination of the feet when they walk/run, etc).
Now if they Army is considering contracting New Balance to provide "shoes" and this difference is part of the contract, slightly different story. For me personally, I would not like them anyway, as I find them to be a bit to heavy for my taste. But then I a guy who enjoys wearing vibram toe shoes all summer very chance I get (not run in them).
I could see the Army contracting to New Balance to provide PT Shoes and could also see the contract also being for particular colors in order to have more uniformity.
If the Army does issue them, will it only be for the 1st pair, will they be a CIF item and replaced at no expense, probably not. I would say if not, then allow the Soldiers buy what they perfer. But then I was out of the office when DA called and asked my opinion. I would have said, I really think you guys up there could find better use of the money it's going to cost in the long run to do this, not including the 10-25% cost over run that we know will happen because they will not do it right the first time. Don't do it!
Now if they Army is considering contracting New Balance to provide "shoes" and this difference is part of the contract, slightly different story. For me personally, I would not like them anyway, as I find them to be a bit to heavy for my taste. But then I a guy who enjoys wearing vibram toe shoes all summer very chance I get (not run in them).
I could see the Army contracting to New Balance to provide PT Shoes and could also see the contract also being for particular colors in order to have more uniformity.
If the Army does issue them, will it only be for the 1st pair, will they be a CIF item and replaced at no expense, probably not. I would say if not, then allow the Soldiers buy what they perfer. But then I was out of the office when DA called and asked my opinion. I would have said, I really think you guys up there could find better use of the money it's going to cost in the long run to do this, not including the 10-25% cost over run that we know will happen because they will not do it right the first time. Don't do it!
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
1SG (Join to see), the issue part sounds more reasonable. I can understand why they are considering this. I have seen some crazy shoes show up to a PT formation such as these.
(1)
(0)
CPT Jacob Swartout
I have seen some bright neon orange and yellow shoes while at the CC/FSC at Ft Jackson. You couldn't have missed them a mile away.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
On one hand, I think it is great that it appears that some thought is going into the well-being of service members and how comfortable shoes relate to better health. On the other hand, the way shoes are procured with a massive contract awarded to a company is a process that will never be able to ensure that all service members get the shoes that are best for them.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I like 'em! Even got the "N" for NAVY! GO NAVY! BEAT ARMY!
I love football season.......
I love football season.......
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
New Balance are some of the only shoes I can wear without being in pain. Anyone want to guess why New Balance are the sneakers that are issued at BMT???? Becasue they are some of the only sneakers that are still MADE IN THE USA. All issued uniform items must be made in the USA.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This is definitely something that should be left up to the individual. I hated the boot camp issue New Balance shoes. I have been a big fan of Asics for years, but recently picked up a pair of Mizuno on a recommendation at the local running shop and fell in love. I would hate to be stuck with garbage shoes just because some paper pusher thought they looked pretty with the PT uniform.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I think the running shoe should be individualized per the fit of each person's foot. The Air Force has removed the color restrictions so that people can get the should that works for them. Personally, NB has never fit my feet well, and they are not a quality running shoe. Asics are my favorite as I have run over 5 half marathons using them.
(1)
(0)
Col (Join to see)
CPT Dunn, yep we had to wear neutral colors like black, gray, white, etc. They issued a new Air Force Instruction (AFI) this year which lifted the color restrictions.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Col (Join to see), I am surprised and is good to hear. I found it shocking when I was in Ft Hood in 2004; I saw an airman running with a dog, headphones, hair pulled down, sunglasses, and a big iPod in the hand. I do not know if that individual was a special case. They looked very happy though.
(0)
(0)
Col (Join to see)
Wow, so if they were running on the street with headphones--> out of regs. You can run on the track and in the gym with headphones, but not on the street while on post. If they were in their PT uniform, hair regs still apply as well, and sunglasses are fine.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
CSM Maynard,
I think an important piece of this issue that is being missed is that the Army and other services aren't the ones pushing for this. The Berry Amendment referenced in the Army Times article is where the idea of service members wearing clothing that was "Made in the USA" started. Up to this point, the services have been given an exemption because there isn't a shoe company out there that met the standard. I have read that New Balance is the closest to providing shoes that are American made, but even they have a lot of their footwear made overseas. I believe that at least one of the sponsors of the amendment are from Maine where New Balance has a lot of their factories. In my opinion, his is another example of politics taking precedence over common sense.
I think an important piece of this issue that is being missed is that the Army and other services aren't the ones pushing for this. The Berry Amendment referenced in the Army Times article is where the idea of service members wearing clothing that was "Made in the USA" started. Up to this point, the services have been given an exemption because there isn't a shoe company out there that met the standard. I have read that New Balance is the closest to providing shoes that are American made, but even they have a lot of their footwear made overseas. I believe that at least one of the sponsors of the amendment are from Maine where New Balance has a lot of their factories. In my opinion, his is another example of politics taking precedence over common sense.
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google