First impression? That classic silhouette is "fire" — the red, white, and black combo is just "timeless". For around $130 USD, the build quality feels solid right out of the box. It's an iconic Jordan series look that never gets old, honestly. First thoughts holding this "Air Jordan 1 Mid" ‘University Blue’: the color is vibrant, and the build looks tidy. Sliding them on, the break-in is quick – a big plus. The silhouette is iconic, and the mid-cut is arguably the most practical for daily life. I own Highs, but I find myself reaching for Mids more often for errands. The clear advantage is the classic look and easy wear. The downside? The materials can sometimes feel a grade below the Highs. Priced at $125, it's a fair deal. It's perfect for a casual wardrobe staple. If you're all about premium materials, maybe save for a High OG release. Potential con? The tech, or lack thereof. It's a 1985 design, so the cushioning is basic. If you're used to modern, plush sneakers, the firm feel might be a shock. Also, the ankle collar on this Mid cut — while comfortable — offers less lockdown than a High for actual basketball. Know what you're buying: a lifestyle icon, "not" a performance beast. Here's my on-feet first look at this new "Air Jordan 1 Mid" ‘Electro Orange’. The color is bold – it looks even better in natural light. Initial comfort is okay; it's a firm, supportive ride typical of the "Jordan 1" lineage. Compared to more padded sneakers, you feel the court roots. I love the confidence this design brings to a fit. The major pro is its statement-making potential. The con? That stiff leather might need some time to soften. At around $125, it's a solid entry into the Jordan world. I'd say it's for those who value color and design history. If you prioritize plush comfort above all, this isn't your shoe.

  • Shown: Seafoam
  • Style: 528895-106

Available

Product reviews

Rating 4.5 out of 5. 8,008 reviews.

Characteristics assessment

Cost-benefit

Rating 4.5 out of 10 5

Comfortable

Rating 4.3 out of 5

It's light

Rating 4.3 out of 5

Quality of materials

Rating 4.1 of 5

popular

Assessment 4 of 5