Female Specific Basketball Shoes:  
An In-depth Analysis of the Effects of 
Underrepresentation in Basketball Footwear 
 
 
Nicole J. Demby 
M.S. Sports Product Design, University of Oregon 
SPD 610: Thesis Capstone Research 
Dr. Susan Sokolowski 
12/11/20  
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PHASE I: RESEARCH 
FALL 2020 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 1 
 
   
 
Table of Contents 
 
PROJECT OVERVIEW .............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
SPORT HISTORY ........................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 
PRODUCT HISTORY ................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
PRODUCT CLASSIFICATION ................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
RULES ........................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
SUCCESS ...................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
ENVIRONMENT .......................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
ATHLETE EXPERIENCE NEEDS ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 
BIOMECHANICAL NEEDS ....................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Jumping ................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Sprinting .................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Cutting ..................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Shuffling .................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
PLAYING POSITIONS ............................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Guards ..................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Forwards .................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Centers .................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
INJURY ......................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
ANATOMICAL DIFFERENCES BY GENDER ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Size & Playing Style ............................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Foot Anatomy.......................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
ATHLETE DEMOGRAPHIC ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
MARKET SIZE ............................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 
COMPETITOR ANALYSIS ........................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Product Anatomy .................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Materials .................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Manufacturing ......................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Graphics, Logos, Color ........................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
APPENDIX A – MARKET ANALYSIS & SWOT ANALYSIS .............. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
APPENDIX B – PATENT LANDSCAPE ................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 
APPENDIX C – PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 
Demby 2 
 
   
 
 
PROJECT OVERVIEW 
Women started playing basketball less than a year after the game was invented and currently 
make up over a quarter of the playing community. However, less than 1% of all basketball shoes 
sold are female specific (Mirabella, 2018). When sports product companies do release a 
women’s basketball shoe, they simply scale down an existing men’s model and sell it in a 
feminine colorway, doing what is known in the industry as “shrink it and pink it”. Most female 
basketball players spend their entire career playing in men’s shoes. Due to the anatomical 
differences between men and women, men’s basketball shoes are not only overdesigned for 
women, but they also do not properly address the structural differences between men’s and 
women’s feet. Playing in men’s footwear perpetuates female underrepresentation within 
basketball and could be a factor in the massive gender gap of women’s ACL injuries in the sport 
compared to men. This research explores opportunities to design a suite of female-specific 
basketball shoes that decrease ACL injury propensity and optimize player performance.  
 
SPORT HISTORY 
From its inception, women’s basketball has sought equality. James Naismith developed the game 
of basketball in 1891 and, a year later, a physical education instructor named Senda Berenson 
adapted the rules and introduced the game to female students at Smith College in Massachusetts 
(History, 2019). Part of her motivation in adapting the game was to promote exercise and 
strengthening in women who, at the time, were perceived as weak and more prone to illness than 
men (Jenkins, 1997). Employers commonly used this reasoning to justify paying women less 
than men; therefore, Berenson wanted to promote health and exercise through the sport of 
basketball in hopes of creating equal pay for women in their jobs (Jenkins, 1997). 
Although a progressive thinker, Berenson still altered Naismith’s rules to make the women’s 
game less strenuous and more elegant to play (Jenkins, 1997). Under these rules, the court was 
divided into three sections, with players required to stay in their section to prevent contact 
(History, 2019). Players were also forbidden to snatch the ball, hold it for more than three 
seconds, or dribble more than three times (History, 2019). These strict rules were made to 
prevent women from behaving “too rambunctiously” during the game and appearing 
“unladylike” (History, 2019). In the documentary Women of Troy, sportswriter Jackie 
MacMullan poignantly explains the evolution of women’s basketball: “With men, they started to 
evolve on their own. Women, it was up to everybody else how they could play the game, not 
them” (Women of Troy, 2020). 
 Eleven months after Berenson’s adaptations, the first women’s college game was held between 
the University of California-Berkeley and Stanford and by 1895 women’s games were held at 
colleges nationwide (Jenkins, 1997). Although there was concern about the psychological and 
physical effects of women playing a sport, women’s basketball continued to grow. In 1926 the 
Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) held its first ever national women’s championship (History, 
2019). By 1938, the three-court format of the women’s game changed to two courts with six 
players per side (History, 2019). Women were not considered strong enough to play a full-court 
game until 1971, when the rules of the game as we know today were established (History, 2019). 
Demby 3 
 
   
 
Title IX was signed into law in 1972, offering female students their first athletic scholarships in 
1973 (History, 2019). Despite this momentum, the first women’s NCAA college tournament did 
not occur until almost a decade later in 1982 (History, 2019). Women’s basketball made its 
Olympic debut in 1976, a full 40 years after the men and the first professional women’s 
basketball league, the WBL, was created two years later in 1978 (History, 2019). The WBL ran 
for three seasons before being disbanded by broadcasting channel owner Fox News (Jenkins, 
1997). Consequently, female basketball players sought playing time overseas in the absence of 
post-college opportunities in the states. The Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA) 
was finally established in 1997 and has since blossomed into the professional women’s league 
we know today (History, 2019). 
 
PRODUCT HISTORY 
The origin of basketball shoes can be traced back to 1917, when Converse released the Chuck 
Taylor All Star (Bowers, 2017). These canvas and rubber sneakers were the most popular 
basketball shoe until 1972, when Nike released its first shoe, the Nike Bruin, which was 
constructed of suede and leather (Bowers, 2017). A year later, Puma signed NBA player Clyde 
Frazier to create the first ever signature basketball shoe, the Puma Clydes which triggered a wave 
of companies releasing basketball shoes (Baker, 2020). However, it was not until 1985, when 
Nike signed Michael Jordan and introduced the iconic Air Jordan I that basketball shoes really 
gained consumer interest (Baker, 2020). Since then, over 50 different NBA players have signed 
with shoe companies to release their own signature shoe lines, some of them creating several 
different models (List, n.d.). Additionally, there are 16 current NBA players who have their own 
shoe deals with companies which include Nike, adidas, and Under Armour (Baker, 2020).  
In the same amount of time, only eight female basketball players have created signature shoes, 
70% of which were released in the 1990’s (Click, 2013). In 1995, Sheryl Swoopes signed with 
Nike to become the first female athlete to have a signature shoe (Nike, n.d.). The Nike Air 
Swoopes line remains the most successful women’s basketball shoe with seven different models, 
the last of which was released in 2002 (Click, 2013). A rise in interest in women’s basketball in 
the late 1990’s led to professional players Lisa Leslie, Cynthia Cooper, and Dawn Staley each 
getting their own signature shoe lines. However, none have matched the Air Swoopes’ success. 
In fact, there has not been a women’s signature basketball shoe on the market since the Adidas 
release of Candace Parker’s third shoe “Adidas Ace3” in 2012 (Click, 2013). Sports companies 
have released general women’s basketball shoes, such as the 2020 Under Armour HOVR 
Breakthru; however, basketball shoes made for women still make up less than 1% of all 
basketball shoes sold in the U.S. (Mirabella, 2018). Although numbers vary on how many 
women play basketball, it is safe to say they make up more than 1% of the sport’s demographic 
and are severely underrepresented. Often, the releases of women’s basketball shoes are limited to 
a few colorways and specific sizes which are often not even big enough to fit the female athletes 
for which the shoes are marketed. To overcome this, female players from the beginner level to 
the WNBA resort to playing in men’s shoes.  
Increased risk of injury and lack of representation are just two of many reasons for designing a 
women’s specific basketball shoe.  
 
Demby 4 
 
   
 
PRODUCT CLASSIFICATION 
Footwear, basketball, women’s 
 
RULES 
The rules of women’s basketball are identical to that of men’s basketball. The circumference of 
the women’s ball is one inch smaller and the location of the three-point line is one foot closer to 
the rim. High-level games consist of four 10-minute quarters with 30-second shot clocks.  
 
SUCCESS 
The highest form of success in basketball is winning games and being the most dominant team in 
a league. However, there are many different forms of individual success within the sport. A 
player can quantify her success through playing statistics such as points, assists, or rebounds per 
game, or through leadership statistics such as value added and player efficiency ratings. 
Additionally, a player can measure her basketball success through levels of personal enjoyment 
and physical health.   
Keys to success depend on skill, basketball IQ, and athletic ability. The fast-paced nature of the 
sport requires constant quick lateral movements to get past and displace opposing players and 
jumping motions to reach the ball faster than others. This combination of motions led to the 
creation of basketball shoes, which provide athletes the ability and support to move quickly and 
explosively on the court.  
 
ENVIRONMENT  
A quality basketball court surface is essential to the game, allowing players the ability to change 
direction as fast as possible with minimal slipping. Court materials directly interface with 
basketball footwear and affect traction design and materiality. Elite-level courts are generally 
composed of hard maple (Newcomb, 2015). This wood variety is tightly grained and harder than 
most woods, making it durable for approximately 10 years athletic play (Newcomb, 2015). Hard 
maple is also lighter in color than most woods, reflecting arena lighting better and creating 
greater contrast between the floor and the ball (Newcomb, 2015). Regardless of the arrangement 
of the three-quarter inch thick maple slabs or the color of the stain used, every single hardwood 
floor is topped with a layer of high-gloss polyurethane coating to create a tacky playing surface 
(Newcomb, 2015).  
 
ATHLETE EXPERIENCE NEEDS 
Basketball is a fast-paced, dynamic game that requires specific skills while moving at multi-
directional high speeds. Consequently, the most successful athletes have a combination of 
strength, explosive power, agility, and endurance (Ransone, 2017). The dynamic nature of the 
sport creates varying levels of playing speed during a game, with one study finding that players 
spend 34.1% of the time playing, 56.7% walking/jogging, and 9% standing (Ransone, 2017). 
Demby 5 
 
   
 
This mix of short-term high-intensity movement and lower intensity long-duration movement 
illustrates the need for both anaerobic and aerobic training to be successful in the sport. 
 In terms of anthropometrics, height plays a large factor in a player’s advantage within the game 
as well as determining playing position on the court. Body composition (the amount of lean 
muscle mass compared to fat mass), is not as essential as height, but it should be noted that there 
is a strong relationship between body composition, aerobic fitness, and anaerobic power in elite 
basketball (Ransone, 2017). One study done by the Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences 
analyzed the relationship of physiological, anthropometric, and motor fitness skills to 
performance in women’s basketball. It was determined that that the factors which most 
discriminated between high and low performers were shooting accuracy, body fat percentage, 
and VO2max (Riezebos, Paterson, Hall, & Yuhasz, 1983). 
 Additionally, different player positions on court have different physical requirements for 
success. The guard positions generally employ smaller players who are faster, more agile, and 
possess skilled dribbling and long-range shooting ability. Inversely, post players are taller and 
have bodies that exude more power for actions like boxing out and rebounding when playing in 
the paint.  
Lastly, it should be noted that, although physical factors such as height, strength, agility, and 
endurance are key indicators of success, the game requires a high degree of technique and 
basketball IQ, which are independent of athletic ability.  
 
BIOMECHANICAL NEEDS 
Basketball is a dynamic game that requires the athletic ability to outmaneuver opponents with 
swift changes in direction of movement and speed. Every athletic movement performed involves 
rapid exertion of skeletal muscle forces to accelerate, decelerate, and stabilize lower extremity 
joints (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). In each basketball game, athletes run an average of 2 miles, 
complete 40-60 short sprints, and perform as many as 70 jumps (McClay et al., 1994). Athletes 
also perform around 100 high-intensity basketball-specific multi-directional movements and take 
over 1,000 shuffling and walking steps (Banda et al., 2019). Players abruptly change movement 
pattern over 1,000 times, with the changes occurring every 2.56 seconds (Ransone, 2017). 
Biomechanical studies have found that most basketball injuries originate from high-stress related 
movements in which excessive doses of force are exerted on the musculoskeletal system 
(McClay et al., 1994). These forces are classified as a weighted combination of intensity, 
frequency, and duration. The same studies found that the jump landing and shuffling movements 
commonly performed in basketball result in greater absolute and relative ground reaction forces 
than any other sport (McClay et al., 1994). Ground reaction forces (GRFs) are widely used in 
biomechanics to analyze the intensity and duration of force the musculoskeletal system is 
subjected to during its contact with the ground. Notation for GRFs is shown below in Figure 1, 
illustrating that the forces are categorized into vertical, mediolateral, and anteroposterior 
directions. Positive values in the graphs indicate propulsion of the body whereas negative values 
imply braking forces (McClay et al., 1994).  
It should be noted that impulse is defined as an amount of force over a given period of time, and 
as a result greater impulse values result in large amounts of stress on the body. Additionally, the 
Demby 6 
 
   
 
slope on the Force vs Time graphs indicate the rate of change at which the impulse occurs, which 
happens through the rapidness of each movement. The steeper each peak is, the greater the 
amount of stress applied to the body over a shorter period of time (McClay et al., 1994). 
 
The following paragraphs analyze the GRFs of the most common basketball movements: 
jumping, sprinting, cutting, and shuffling.  
 
 
Second Vertical 
Peak 
Vertical Impulse 
(>lbw) 
lbw 
Lateral Impulse 
AP I ~ _,,.:;:(?/:/ ;- _ IPmrpouPls"e• M 
(bw)~~ (~;,~ 
t Braking l Im  pulse Medial Impulse 
Braking Peak Medial Peak  
Figure 1: Conventions for ground reaction forces (McClay et al, 1994) 
 
Jumping 
Whether a player is jumping to catch a rebound, block a shot, or shoot a jump shot, jumping is an 
integral part of basketball. Studies have found correlations between vertical jump ability and 
increasing level of play, suggesting that the best players possess the ability to jump higher than 
others (Ransone, 2017). Testing has also reported significant relationships between jumping 
ability and sprint and agility performance, suggesting the importance of overall lower-body 
power within the sport of basketball (Banda et al., 2019). Vertical jump landings result in large 
GRFs in all three directions, with the greatest force in the vertical direction (McClay et al.,1994). 
Jumping movements result in the largest angular velocities and strain rates at the knee and ankle 
compared to other movements analyzed (McClay et al., 1994).  
 
Due to the dynamic nature of basketball, capturing realistic movement data in a lab is difficult 
and often not reflective of live game scenarios. Biomechanical labs aim to simulate the jump 
movements performed during layups and jump shots in their studies; however, it can be assumed 
that the data found is conservative compared to the forces experienced during live playing time 
(McClay et al, 1994). That being said, jump landings experienced after a layup produce the 
greatest vertical GRFs at seven times the athlete’s body weight on a single foot (McClay et al., 
1994). The same study revealed jump shot GRFs five times the athlete’s body weight on each 
Demby 7 
 
   
 
foot. The GRF analysis of a layup landing is shown below in Figure 2 (McClay et al., 1994). It is 
important to note the sudden impact peak resulting in a rapid force rise time and subsequent great 
amount of force exerted on the body.  
 
The graph also indicates that a jump landing is biphasic: that of initial contact and then the 
application of the total body weight. In the first phase, the toe and forefoot region typically make 
initial contact with the ground after a jump and the GRFs are around one and a half times the 
athlete’s body weight (McClay et al., 1994). In the second phase, the GRF migrates posteriorly 
along the foot and GRFs as high as four times the bodyweight are experienced near the heel 
(McClay et al., 1994). It should be noted however, that players who tend to land flat-footed load 
force in their midfoot only and experience GRFs as high as six times their body weight (McClay 
et al., 1994). Therefore, forefoot strike landings have the ability to reduce GRFs by as much as 
50% compared to midfoot landings. It is theorized that forefoot landings increase joint range of 
movement and the amount of time the body takes to decelerate from the movement, reflecting a 
flatter impulse curve on the Vertical Force vs Time graph (McClay et al., 1994).  
 
Vertical Force vs Time 
70--,------------, 
8 
V 6 
(bw) 
4 
2 
Q..L- -----="'"---' 
Time (s) 
 
Figure 2: Vertical GRFs of a Layup Landing (McClay et al., 1994) 
 
Sprinting 
Running is a crucial component of basketball, with athletes spending almost 50% of a basketball 
game performing some form of running (Hoffman et al., 1996). The most skilled players are 
generally faster and more agile than less skilled players and the ability to quickly execute sprints 
and change direction has been linked with increased playing time in collegiate basketball 
(Hoffman et al., 1996). 
 
A study analyzing the movement patterns of Italian elite women’s basketball games found that 
that high-intensity specific movements occur every 16.6 seconds and sprints occur every 33.3 
seconds of live playing time (Conte et al., 2015). Additionally, 86.7% of these sprints in the 
study occurred over distances shorter than 10 meters, with the most common sprint distance 
traveled being between one to five meters. The study also broke down the type of sprints 
performed during games and found that linear sprints made up 48.3% of total sprinting, followed 
by 31% of curved sprints and 20.7% of change of direction movements (Conte et al., 2015). 
Repeated sprint activity is a significant component of elite women’s basketball and therefore the 
ability to perform repeated sprint activity is a crucial biomechanical element to success.  
 
Figure 3 indicates low amounts of mediolateral GRFs experienced during sprinting but notably 
high vertical forces (McClay et al., 1994). The peaks in the anteroposterior graph indicate the 
Demby 8 
 
   
 
propulsive starting and braking forces experienced by the athlete when starting and ending a 
sprint (McClay et al., 1994). 
 
Vertical Force vs Time Mediolateral Force vs Time Anteroposterior Force vs Time 
2 
V ML 0 ---h-A-F---= = ....___.-._~ AP Q -1,-~- -,,C.----""--l 
(bw) (bw) (bw) 
1 
-1 -1 
Time (s) Time (s) Time (s) 
 
Figure 3: Vertical, Anteroposterior, and Mediolateral GRFs of Sprinting (McClay et al., 1994) 
 
Cutting 
Cutting is defined as a sudden change of direction performed during a sprint, commonly used on 
offense to outmaneuver defending basketball players on the floor. Although vertical GRFs 
experienced during cutting are similar to those experienced during sprinting, athletes also 
experience mediolateral forces as high as 1.6 times their body weight, shown in Figure 4 
(McClay et al., 1994). The positive values on the mediolateral graph indicate that the forces are 
entirely lateral. This loads increased amounts of stress on the lateral border of the foot, 
specifically the fifth metatarsal (McClay et al., 1994). 
 
Vertical Force vs Time Mediolateral Force vs Time 
4~-------~ 
3 
V ML 
(bw) 2 (bw) O --+-<-- ------"""--i 
-1 
o~ -------~ 
Time (s) Time (s) 
 
Figure 4: Vertical and Mediolateral GRFs of a cutting movement (McClay et al., 1994) 
 
Shuffling 
Shuffling is commonly performed during defense as a counter to the opposing player’s cutting 
maneuver in an effort to stay squarely in between the player and the basket. The negative values 
of the mediolateral graph in Figure 5 indicate that shuffling exhibits the largest peak medial 
forces and lowest lateral forces of any other basketball movement studied (McClay et al., 1994). 
This implies that shuffling is a primarily medially applied force and can be as great as two times 
a player’s body weight on each foot (McClay et al., 1994). It should also be noted that the 
Vertical Force vs Time graph is the only graph that presents three force peaks, suggesting that 
shuffling produces the largest amount impulse of the studied movements.  
 
Demby 9 
 
   
 
Vertical Force vs Time Medio/atera/ Force vs Time 
2 
ML 
V (bw) Q -;-------..----t 
(bw) 
7 
-7 
Time (s) Time (s) 
 
Figure 5: GRFs of a shuffling movement (McClay et al., 1994) 
 
PLAYING POSITIONS 
Athlete biomechanical and physiological loads experienced during a basketball game greatly 
depend on playing position. The playing positions within basketball are categorized as guards, 
forwards, and centers. A standard lineup generally consists of two guards (point guard and 
shooting guard), two forwards (small forward and power forward), and one center. Athlete sizes 
vary drastically between playing levels and positions (Basketball, n.d.). The average height and 
weight of WNBA athletes by playing position is shown below in Figure 6 (WNBA Advanced 
Stats, 2020). Guards are typically lighter, shorter, and have a more mesomorphic build than 
forwards and centers. Forwards are taller than guards but shorter and lighter than centers, who 
are customarily the largest players on the team. These anthropometric differences reflect vastly 
different playing styles and responsibilities within each playing position.  
Avg. WNBA Athlete Height and Weight by Playing Position
6'2" 6'4"
5'10" 250
6 201
5 182 200
156
4 150
3
100
2
1 50
0 0
GUARD FORWARD CENTER
■ HEIGHT (ft) ■ WEIGHT (lbs)
 
Figure 6: Average Female Athlete Height and Weight by Playing Position 
 
 
Guards 
Guards are the primary ballhandlers and are responsible for coordinating the team’s offense. 
Their movements include passing, dribble penetration, defensive pressure, transition offense, and 
outside shooting, resulting in longitudinal movements along the court (Trninić & Dizdar, 2000). 
Guard players perform the greatest number of high-intensity movements in a game, resulting in 
better agility performance and speed than forwards and centers (Trninić & Dizdar, 2000). 
Demby 10 
 
Height (ft.)
Weight (lbs)
   
 
Outside players typically have a lower body mass than inside players and thus require less force 
to accelerate than post players. Consequently, players in the guard position tend to perform more 
accelerations at a higher intensity than forwards and centers (Trninić & Dizdar, 2000). One study 
found that guards perform side-shuffles over longer distances than forwards and centers, 
producing greater medial forces on their lower limbs more often. (Delextrat & Cohen, 2009). 
Players at the guard position perform agile movements more frequently and at quicker speeds 
than the rest of the team, experiencing peak outputs for longer amounts of time, shown in Figure 
7 (Delextrat & Cohen, 2009). As a result, guards have the highest VO2 max and blood lactate 
levels, awarding them the highest anaerobic capacity of any position on the team (Delextrat & 
Cohen, 2009). 
 
Forwards 
Forwards are all-around players that have a stronger inside game than guards and better outside 
shooting capabilities than centers. Forwards typically move horizontally in their positional play 
to get open, with common movement patterns including dribble penetration, off-ball offense, 
setting and working off screens, and shooting (Trninić & Dizdar, 2000). Forwards chiefly play 
around the perimeter and use various moves to destabilize their opponents, resulting in many 
high-intensity accelerations and decelerations. Each of these movements require high anaerobic 
power and lower leg strength. Studies have found that forwards have the greatest leg flexor 
strength and peak torque knee extensor values, depicted in Figure 8 (Delextrat & Cohen, 2009). 
As a result, players at the forward position have the highest anaerobic power on the team as they 
experience agile movements less frequently than guards but with more force, resulting in greater 
force peak outputs over shorter periods of time (Delextrat & Cohen, 2009).  
 
Centers 
Centers’ movement is focused near the basket as they dominate inside the paint, focusing on 
offensive and defensive rebounding, blocking shots, setting screens, and posting up to get open 
(Trninić & Dizdar, 2000). As a result, centers typically perform the most jumps in a game. 
Additionally, centers perform the greatest amount of high-intensity full-extension jumps as 
opposed to smaller jumps commonly performed by guards when making a shot or pass (McClay 
et al., 1994). As the largest players on their team, centers accelerate slower and at a lower 
intensity, taking longer to achieve adequate speeds (Reina et al., 2019). This is because these 
taller athletes also require more force exertion to accelerate than smaller players (Delextrat & 
Cohen, 2009). Instead, center movement is vertical with a strategy focusing on player’s use of 
footwork and strength to maneuver around opponents under the rim. Their greater body mass 
results in the highest power output levels, making them vastly more explosive than the rest of the 
team (Delextrat & Cohen, 2009). 
 
 
Demby 11 
 
   
 Peak torque I ■ Guards □ Forwards D Centres I 
Power (W.kg"1) j ■ Guards D Foiwards D Centres I (%OW) 
12  
200 - .-----, 
10 
Mean power Peak power 60 degrees.ls 180 degrees1s 
Figure 2. Relative peak torques (PT, % of bodyweight [BW]) developec 
Figure 1. Mean power and peak power achieved by guards, forwards, 
b)" gu. .d s, fo rwards, and cer1te rs durhg knee extension o f the dominant 
and centers during the 30-second W ingate test. *Significant difference, I mb at 2-..elocities: 60and 180 degrees/s- 1• •Significan: drference, p < 
p < 0.05. Values are expressed as mean ::t SD. 0.06 . Voluco ore c):prcoocd as mean ::!: SD. 
Figure 7:Positional Mean and Peak Power Output Figure 8: Positional Knee Extension Peak Torques 
over 30-Second Duration (Delextrat & Cohen, 2009).  Developed at 60° and 180° Knee Angles 
 (Delextrat & Cohen, 2009). 
 
INJURY 
Females are almost twice as likely to sustain an injury while playing basketball than men 
(Zelisko, Noble, & Porter, 1982). An epidemiologic breakdown of women’s basketball injuries 
found that over 60% of both game and practice injuries incurred are to lower extremities, most 
commonly being ankle ligament sprains followed by anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears 
(Agel et al., 2007). In fact, female basketball players are up to eight times more likely to tear an 
ACL than their male counterparts (MacMillan, 2020). ACL tears are devastating injuries that 
require surgery 96% of the time and generally take 6-12 months for recovery (LaBella et al., 
2011).  
The ACL is one of four main ligaments that stabilizes the knee and is crucial to agility sports like 
basketball. The ligament runs diagonally through the knee and is responsible for stabilizing 
rotational movements that occur during cutting and pivoting activities. The ACL does this in two 
ways: first acting mechanically through its connections to the tibia and femur as a passive 
restraint to excessive movement; second, the ACL uses proprioception to help sense the knee 
joint’s position in space (University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority, n.d.). This 
sends signals to the brain and spinal cord when the joint exceeds its normal range of movement 
and consequently stimulates the appropriate muscles to re-stabilize the joint (University of 
Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority, n.d.). 70% of knee injuries occur from non-contact 
situations such as sudden changes in direction like pivoting, cutting, and landing from jumps 
(University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority, n.d.). The mechanism of injury occurs 
when the knee enters what is referred to as “the point of no return” in which there is a loss of 
neuromuscular control and the brain is unable to stabilize the joint. In this brief state of 
instability, excessive forces are loaded onto the ACL, causing it to stretch and, in most cases, tear 
(Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). Although this phenomenon occurs in both genders, females are 
predisposed to enter this “point of no return” more often than men and are thus anatomically 
more inclined to tear their ACL (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). Although every knee injury is 
multifactorial and uniquely situational, researchers have been able to narrow down the cause of 
this undeniable gender discrepancy to three main factors: female differences in the ligament 
itself, wider hips, and a lower center of mass.  
Demby 12 
 
   
 
Within the knee itself, MRI analysis studies have found that men have greater ACL thickness 
than women in proportion to lean body mass (Anderson et al., 2001). Additionally, women tend 
to have a narrower intercondylar notch in proportion to their body size (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). 
This notch is a groove that the ACL runs through and is located on the femur’s interface with the 
tibia. Research has found correlations between narrower notches and ACL tears, placing women 
at greater vulnerability (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002).  
The remaining two factors, wider hips and lower center of mass, are evolutionary responses to 
childbirth. Women typically have wider hips than men to strategize giving birth, resulting in a 
greater “Q-angle”, shown in Figure 9 (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). Greater Q-angles consequently 
affect knee alignment and result in knee valgus, or the tendency of knees to rotate inward during 
movement, as shown in Figure 10. “Athletes with Q-values above 15° generally have leg 
postures of greater genu valgus and excessive external tibial rotation” (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). 
~\~ ! t'f
0 l idp<>int ot pa
\ t, e\ \\r a,  ~ne\' lm t
 
\ udp oa ei rn dt e o  tl o p  ate\\a 
1,1..J ~l> ~.l .- \_ fa __f ib~\
tu  bf.lclf: 
 t-1orrnal  
  Fig. 9: Q-angle (Pettit & Bryson, 2002)           Fig. 10: Normal vs Knee Valgus Alignment (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002) 
       
Knee valgus alignment is troublesome because it places hip stabilizing muscles in lengthened 
positions more frequently than correct knee alignment (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). Muscles are less 
strong when they are placed in lengthened positions because there are fewer cross-bridges 
between them (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). This weakens the lower leg’s ability to stabilize the knee 
and channels more load onto the knee’s ligaments and tendons, consequently placing more stress 
on the ACL (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002).   
Lastly, through evolution women have developed bodies with lower centers of mass to improve 
balance while carrying children (Fields, 2012). This lower center of mass consequently results in 
different movement patterns in which women hold their trunks more upright during activities 
than men (Fields, 2012). However, it was found that excessive ACL shear forces can be avoided 
in over 90% of athletes if the knee and trunk are flexed more than 30° during movement (Pettitt 
& Bryson, 2002).  Therefore, women’s anatomical disinclination to hinge at the hips during 
movements prevents the activation of key knee stabilizing muscles in the posterior chain, most 
important being the hamstrings. This results in females having imbalanced strength in their lower 
leg muscles where typical movements are quad-dominant with a delay in hamstring activation 
(Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). Imbalanced quadricep-to-hamstring ratio has been identified as a 
mechanism for non-contact injuries because hamstrings act as an agonist with the ACL to help 
Demby 13 
 
   
 
prevent anterior tibial translation and stabilize the knee (Pettitt & Bryson, 2002). Some studies 
also theorize that this causes athletes to land from movements flat-footed rather than on the balls 
of their feet, which does not activate calf and hamstring muscles and places higher load on the 
knee ligaments (National Institutes of Health Medicine Plus, 2013).  
 
ANATOMICAL DIFFERENCES BY GENDER 
Although the sport is played in the exact same environment under identical rules, there are 
countless differences between men and women’s basketball. These differences illustrate the 
importance and need for female-specific basketball footwear.  
 
 
Size & Playing Style 
Men’s basketball greatly emphasizes athleticism; a large amount of the game is played above the 
rim and male athletes rely on speed and explosiveness for success. Women’s basketball 
alternatively places an emphasis on basketball IQ and finesse in the absence of sheer brawn. 
These differing playing styles are in direct reflection to the anatomical differences between men 
and women. It is no surprise that men typically have higher verticals and faster sprinting times 
than their female counterparts. Male NBA players are on average 6.5 inches taller and 40 pounds 
heavier than female WNBA players at the same position, illustrated in Figures 11 and 12 
(WNBA Advanced Stats, 2020). Because men weigh more and generally have more muscle 
mass, larger GRFs are produced with every step. Greater muscle mass also produces more 
explosive energy with each movement. As a result, the sports product industry has designed 
cushioning in basketball shoes to withstand the large forces exerted by men. Female athletes, on 
the other hand, do not require such overdesigned footwear and could instead benefit from lighter, 
more flexible, female-specific cushioning systems which would be inadequate for male athletes.  
 
WNBA vs NBA Average Player Height by Position WNBA vs NBA Average Player Weight by Position
6'11" 249
7 6'8" 250 224197 201
182
6.5 6'4" 6'4" 2006'2" 156
150
6 5'10"
100
5.5 50
5 0
Guard Forward Center Guard Forward Center
WNBA NBA WNBA NBA
Figures 11 and 12: Height and Weight Differences by Position and Gender 
 
Foot Anatomy 
Basketball footwear is traditionally designed on a unisex last that is predominantly sized for 
men’s feet. When basketball shoes are released in ‘women’s’ sizing, the initial designs based off 
male lasts are usually just made smaller. However, women’s feet have significantly different 
Demby 14 
 
Height (ft)
Weight (lbs)
   
 
proportions than men and cannot be replicated by simply scaling down men’s sizing. Wearing 
incorrectly fitting footwear while performing high-intensity movements can severely affect 
comfort and performance and increase injury risk. Wearing shoes that fit incorrectly can lead to 
gapping or shifting of the foot inside the shoe, which results in instability and can place undue 
amounts of stress on knee and ankle joints.  
 
Additionally, female feet generally have a wider forefoot and narrower heel than men’s, creating 
a triangular shape as opposed to male’s rectangular shaped foot (Carelock, 2020). Women also 
have a naturally higher arch (Carelock, 2020). As a result of the anatomical differences 
mentioned, women have different movement patterns which load their feet differently, requiring 
alternative cushioning needs than what is found in current basketball footwear. Due to the higher 
arch, greater amounts of force are placed on the lateral column of the foot than men, who 
typically experience the highest loads in the forefoot directly under the balls of their feet 
(Carelock, 2020). Wearing men’s shoes that are too narrow in the forefoot can create blisters and 
discomfort among female users, as well as increase the danger of collapsed arches in the absence 
of proper support. Collapsed arches can affect lower leg and knee joint alignment, resulting in 
greater knee valgus angles and increased risk of ACL tears. Studies have also found that proper 
arch support provides better proprioception to the athlete, which can increase stability by as 
much as 25% and reduce the incidence of ankle rolls (Han, Anson, Waddington, Adams, & Liu, 
2015).  
 
ATHLETE DEMOGRAPHIC 
The athlete is an elite female basketball player, 17– 40 years old, who plays multiple times a 
week at levels ranging from AAU to the WNBA.  
 
MARKET SIZE 
Around 24 million people played basketball in 2018, making it one of the most popular sports in 
the U.S. (Lock, 2020). An estimated 25% of those players are female, therefore the potential 
market size for a women’s basketball shoe is 6 million (Lynn, 2020). Of the 6 million players, 
399,067 of them play in high school, 16,509 play in the NCAA, and 144 play in the WNBA 
(Women’s, 2020).  Recent trends also suggest that these numbers are growing despite the 
countless barriers surrounding women’s sports. Social media platforms like Twitter and 
Instagram have helped create exposure to the sport: in 2018 there was a 30% increase in 
women’s NCAA basketball social media interactions and a 1,900% increase in social medial 
video views (NCAA, 2018). The market size is expected to continue expanding as viewership, 
participation, and salaries for women’s basketball rise each year (Durham, 2019). 
 
COMPETITOR ANALYSIS 
Basketball shoes are split into three gender categories: men’s, women’s and unisex shoes. Within 
these categories are shoes designed specifically for smaller guard players, larger post players, 
and all-around hybrid players who are typically forwards. The men’s category offers a wide 
Demby 15 
 
   
 
variety of shoe options for each playing position in terms of pricing, sizes, and features like 
graphics and color ways. Women’s basketball shoes are so uncommon that they typically do not 
specialize in specific playing positions and are generally designed as basic all-around playing 
shoes. Due to this, the market analysis and SWOT analysis lists in Appendix A are comprised of 
men’s shoes for each position type along with the few women’s models on the market.  
In September 2020, Under Armour released the “HOVR Breakthru”, their first ever women’s 
specific basketball shoe (see Figure 13). This is currently the only basketball shoe on the market 
that caters explicitly to women’s feet with a higher arch, narrower heel collar, and flexible mesh 
upper. Detailed SWOT analysis of the HOVR Breakthru is detailed in Figure 14. 
UA Women's UA HOVR "" Breakthru 
MSRP:$110 
Features & Benefits 
- Breathable mesh upper with strategic support films, designed specific to women 
- Half-bootie construction with molded collar for a comfortable fit & support 
- 3D molded sockliner for underfoot cushioning & support 
- UA HOVR™ technology provides 'zero gravity feel' to maintain energy return 
- Compression mesh Energy Web contains & molds UA HOVR"' foam for maximum cushion 
(UA, n.d.) 
 
Figure 13: UA Women’s HOVR Breakthru Basketball Shoe 
 
 
Product Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats 
UA HOVR Women’s specific fit, great 
Breakthru cushioning via midsole HOVR 
Only offered in mid cut Only women’s specific Small market size may have 
energy web system Small colorway selection shoe in the market poor sales 
Figure 14: UA Women’s HOVR Breakthru SWOT Analysis 
 
Product Anatomy 
Basketball places significant and spontaneous forces on the lower limbs and feet. Therefore, 
basketball footwear needs to have features of support, cushioning, flexibility, and stability. The 
extent of each of these components within a shoe greatly depends on each player’s body type and 
playing position. Post players with heavier frames typically wear shoes that emphasize stability, 
ankle support, and cushioning, whereas smaller guards seek out shoes that are lighter and more 
flexible to aid quick movements and acceleration (Basketball Shoes, n.d.).  
 
The state-of-the art basketball shoe is composed of three main parts: the upper, midsole, and 
outsole.The upper is the fabric part of the shoe that interfaces with the top of the athlete’s foot. 
Its main functions are to keep the foot comfortably secure within the shoe and promote stability. 
Excess movement of the foot within the shoe can result in feet striking the ground in a fashion 
that creates risk of ankle rolls and places undue stress on the Achilles tendon or knee joint. 
Uppers contain the shoe’s heel collar, which is designed in various styles: high, mid, and low top 
cuts. High-top shoes generally extend over the top of the ankle and provide the greatest degree of 
stabilization whereas low-tops provide more flexibility and better turning capability. State-of-
the-art uppers have thermoregulation components to prevent the foot from overheating. Uppers 
also contain the shoe’s lacing system, tongue, vamp, heel panel, and toe cap. Many basketball 
Demby 16 
 
   
 
shoes also include a strap in addition to the lacing system to offer extra foot lockdown for 
stability. Basketball uppers commonly have thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) overlays near the 
toe and outside edges for added durability and abrasion resistance. Many brands have proprietary 
upper technology such as Nike Flywire and adidas Techfit. 
 
The midsole is arguably the most engineered component as cushioning technology has rapidly 
advanced in the last few decades. The midsole is the main cushioning element of the shoe and is 
designed to strategically absorb the forces of running and jumping while also providing high 
energy return. The midsole is usually comprised of three main elements: the main sole that runs 
the entire length of the shoe, specialized cushioning units in the heel and forefoot, and a shank 
which adds structure and prevents torsion. Basic principles of physics show that stiffer midsole 
materials create better energy return, allowing players to explode from the ground with greater 
force. Softer materials are better at dampening impact forces and thus provide more cushion. 
Finding the most strategic balance between these material characteristics and dimensions such as 
midsole thickness is an important factor of footwear selection among players of different body 
types and playing styles. Guard-specific shoes generally have thinner midsoles like the Nike 
VaporMax, which is low to the ground and attached directly to the shoe’s upper, resulting in 
greater spring and flexibility. Additionally, technologies like Zoom Air have revolutionized 
cushioning especially for larger post players and is used extensively in Nike Lebron shoes (Nike, 
n.d.).  
The final main component of the shoe is the outsole. The outsole is the interface of the shoe and 
the ground and is chiefly responsible for traction control. Herringbone patterns are typically the 
most successful traction patterns; however, different sports product companies have varying 
proprietary traction patterns and zoning. State-of-the art shoes have traction patterns that also 
cater to player position. The Nike Kyrie is a good example of this as its traction pattern extends 
up the sidewalls of the midsole’s shoe, an addition the Nike designers made after observing the 
amount of time Irving spent on the sides of his feet when making quick lateral movements 
(Kyrie, n.d.). Patents pertaining to each of these proprietary technologies can be found in 
Appendix B.  
 
Materials  
Basketball shoe uppers are composed of a layered combination of synthetic engineered knits, air 
mesh or PU foam, TPU films and hot melt additions for durability, and sometimes details like 
synthetic leather. Each brand generally has their own proprietary engineered knit, such as Nike 
Flyknit and adidas PrimeKnit. The material used for footwear knits is generally a blend of 
polyester, nylon, and spandex. Technologies like Nike KnitPosite, seen in the Lebron 17’s, blend 
Flyknit with more durable materials like pre-twisted heat-molded yarns to create a basketball-
specific upper material that is more durable than original Flyknit (Lebron, n.d.). Midsole 
materials are generally made of EVA or some type of foam compound. However, each company 
uses a proprietary design and construction to create a unique cushioning feel. Nike React, Under 
Armour MicroG, and adidas UltraBoost are examples of different proprietary foam technologies. 
Thermo-plastic polyurethane (TPU) is another common foam type and is used in UltraBoost 
(Jane, 2018). However, many state-of-the-art basketball shoes also have cushioning technologies 
within the midsole in addition to the foam. Nike extensively uses air for this in their zoom airbag 
units which are designed in various shapes and sizes depending on the shoe. Under Armour uses 
Demby 17 
 
   
 
HOVR technology, which utilizes a mesh energy web that wraps around the cushioning core to 
deliver enhanced responsiveness and energy return (Hodge & Writer, 2020). Shanks that are 
housed within the midsole are generally made from a rigid plastic to provide reinforcing 
stability. Lastly, outsoles are typically made of rubber. The rubber’s composition, however, 
depends on the playing surface. Outdoor-specific shoes utilize a harder, more durable rubber 
whereas indoor shoes made for wood floors use a softer rubber. Adidas is partnered with 
Continental tires and utilizes the exact rubber compound found in car tires as the material for 
their footwear outsoles.  
 
Manufacturing 
The manufacturing process of making the footwear upper consists of die-cutting each upper 
component and stitching the ensemble together. Materials like engineered knits require their own 
manufacturing process and are made on CNC knitting machines (Motawi, 2017). The upper is 
then stitched to the mesh and lining layers and any TPU reinforcements or padding are heat 
bonded or cemented to the upper before the entire piece is attached to the bottom strobel sock 
(Motawi, 2017). Once the upper is complete it is placed on a shoe last to take form before being 
attached to the midsole and outsole. The midsole foam is made through compression molding 
and any additional cushioning such as airbag or gel units are glued into place (Motawi, 2017). 
Each company has a proprietary blend of mixing, molding, heating, and cooling resulting in the 
slightly different foam types seen on the market. The outsole rubber is made through injection 
molding where natural rubber is mixed, cut, and dyed before being cured inside a mold of the 
shoe tread pattern (Motawi, 2017). To create differences in outsole rubber stiffness for outdoor 
versus indoor shoes, natural rubber is heated at precise temperatures for specific amounts of 
time. This heating process determines the rubber’s composition and firmness as the rubber 
becomes stiffer the longer it is heated (Nike, n.d.). Once all three main components are 
individually made, the upper is glued to the midsole which is then glued to the outsole. 
 
Graphics, Logos, Color 
Basketball footwear typically does not include graphic applications but instead utilizes color 
blocking and different textures within the upper. The Kobe series is a good example of this 
through its use of subtle snakeskin patterning on the upper. Some models apply graphical 
patterns like color marbling on the outsole. Logo use is predominantly on the tongue, lateral and 
medial sides, and heel. The largest logo is generally presented on the lateral side of the shoe.  
There are countless colorways available in men’s and unisex sizes. However, filtering by gender 
results in severely more limited color options, typically leaving only a standard black and white 
and pink variations. It is common for sports companies to simply release men’s footwear models 
in “female” colorways which generally include various shades of pink and purple. This 
marketing strategy is immediately seen on the Nike website when searching “women’s 
basketball shoes” versus “men’s basketball shoes”, shown in Figures 15 and 16. However, many 
female athletes do not desire these colors and instead want the wider range of options provided in 
the men’s sizes. A quote by Marketing to Women author Marti Barletta explains the situation 
perfectly: “when pink is a color women can choose, they will choose it. When it is the only color 
that isn’t the ‘normal’ one, women will not choose it,” says Barletta: “they don’t want it forced 
on them” (Barletta, 2006).  
Demby 18 
 
   
 
8fttebiil/ Stion 
Womens Basketball Shoes (85) HideFillllrJ .! Sort8y v 
-.lf.fe.s.r.y.s..  ...... 
T.r.a.n.r.io &Ovni , 
Track& F..o 
Volt}'bal 
wCh-iMl19ieing 
Shoes $100& lhter 
...... •• 
K)ot 1 S-;You l(y
,~.,....  ~•eWlShoe ..,
rl,e,7.",".(.:r .tii.l1.0.f' ' 
KobeBtyant 
.le,&,,.o .n. .J.,.m. es m o 
'"°"' 
$140 
 
Figure 15: Nike “Women’s Basketball Shoes” Webpage (Nike, n.d.) 
 
Mens Basketball Shoes (98) ttdRfAIIR : SartBi, v 
"J_""',,. . 
•-... 
~ 
.r.-.....  
-J,-,onci &Orr' -... · 
-~•"00'-Unw 
-· ....,  Kyra 7ByYa.., Kyrio! 7"c..-,..., B_lba,11 Shoe ........0.=.1..D.r."  
6Cakn tCdo< 
"'" S>30  
Figure 16: Nike “Men’s Basketball Shoes” Webpage (Nike, n.d.) 
 
CONCLUSION 
Females who play sports are generally more successful; they are more likely to graduate high 
school, receive post-graduate degrees, and earn more money (Glass, 2013). In fact, 96% of 
female C-suite executives played sports as teenagers (Glass, 2013). However, the same study 
found that by the age of 14 girls drop out of sports twice as often as boys (Glass, 2013). 
Although reasoning for this is multifactorial, lack of representation in the sports product industry 
certainly plays a factor. Additionally, the non-existence of female-specific footwear in basketball 
could be contributing to the large gender gap of ACL injuries. Female-specific basketball shoes 
have the potential to increase participation rates, player performance, and player safety.  
 
Demby 19 
 
   
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
Adidas Harden Stepback Shoes - Black: Adidas US. (n.d.). Retrieved November 03, 2020, from 
https://www.adidas.com/us/harden-stepback-shoes/EF9893.html 
Adidas Harden Vol. 4 Shoes - Black: Adidas US. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 2020, from 
https://www.adidas.com/us/harden-vol.-4-shoes/EF9924.html 
Adult UA Curry 7 TB Basketball Shoes. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 2020, from 
https://www.underarmour.com/en-us/p/basketball/adult-ua-curry-7-tb-basketball-
shoes/3023300.html?start=0 
% 
Anderson, A.F., D.C. Dome, S. Gautam, M.H. Awh, and G.W. Rennirt. Correlation of 
anthropometric measurements, strength, anterior cruciate ligament size, and intercondylar 
notch characteristics to set differences in anterior cruciate ligament tear rates. Am. J. 
Sports Med. 29(1):58–66. 2001. 
Baker, K. (2020, January 15). Joel Embiid becomes 16th current NBA player with signature 
shoe. Retrieved October 29, 2020, from https://www.axios.com/joel-embiid-signature-
shoe-under-armour-7aa01c12-e816-4114-b60a-77b372cbbe6e.html 
Banda, D. S., Beitzel, M. M., Kammerer, J. D., Salazar, I., & Lockie, R. G. (2019). Lower-Body 
Power Relationships to Linear Speed, Change-of-Direction Speed, and High-Intensity 
Running Performance in DI Collegiate Women’s Basketball Players, Journal of Human 
Kinetics, 68(1), 223-232. doi: https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2019-0067 
Barletta, M. (2006). Marketing to women: How to increase your share of the world's largest 
market. Retrieved November 18, 2020, from https://www.amazon.com/Marketing-Women-
Increase-Worlds-Largest/dp/1419520199 
Basketball Scholarships: How to Get a Basketball Scholarship. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 
2020, from https://www.athleticscholarships.net/basketballscholarships.htm 
Basketball Shoes. (n.d.). Retrieved November 15, 2020, from http://www.faqs.org/sports-
science/A-Ba-and-timeline/Basketball-Shoes.html 
Bowers, B. (2017, October 03). From Chuck Taylor to LeBron X: Year-by-Year Evolution of 
NBA Sneakers. Retrieved October 29, 2020, from 
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1519230-from-chuck-taylor-to-lebron-x-year-by-year-
evolution-of-nba-sneakers 
Carelock, Ben DPM. (2020, June). Personal Interview.  
Click, C. (2013, April 20). The Complete History of Women's Signature Basketball Shoes. 
Retrieved October 29, 2020, from https://www.complex.com/sneakers/2013/04/the-
complete-history-of-womens-signature-basketball-shoes 
Conte, Daniele; Favero, Terence G.; Lupo, Corrado; Francioni, Fabio M.; Capranica, Laura; 
Tessitore, Antonio Time-Motion Analysis of Italian Elite Women's Basketball Games, The 
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research: January 2015 - Volume 29 - Issue 1 - p 144-
150 
Demby 20 
 
   
 
Delextrat, A., & Cohen, D. (2009). Strength, Power, Speed, and Agility of Women Basketball 
Players According to Playing Position. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 
1974-1981. 
Durham, M. (2019, April 23). Record-setting 2019 tournament concludes with thrilling Women's 
Final Four in Tampa. Retrieved November 03, 2020, from 
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/record-setting-2019-tournament-
concludes-thrilling-women-s-final-four-tampa 
Fields, R. (2012, October 05). Olympic Differences in the Way Men and Women Move. 
Retrieved November 14, 2020, from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/olympic-differences-
men-women_b_1745276 
Glass, A. (2013, June 24). Ernst &amp; Young Studies The Connection Between Female 
Executives And Sports. Retrieved November 26, 2020, from 
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanaglass/2013/06/24/ernst-young-studies-the-connection-
between-female-executives-and-sports/?sh=2bde9f4533a2 
Han, J., Anson, J., Waddington, G., Adams, R., &amp; Liu, Y. (2015, October 25). The Role of 
Ankle Proprioception for Balance Control in relation to Sports Performance and Injury. 
Retrieved November 26, 2020, from 
https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2015/842804/ 
History. (2019, February 22). Retrieved October 20, 2020, from 
https://www.wbhof.com/about/history/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIvr3S_brC7AIVrf_jBx1qrwR
eEAAYASAAEgKdrfD_BwE 
Hodge, W., &amp; Writer, K. (2020, March 26). Under Armour Launches Innovative Footwear 
Technology "HOVR". Retrieved November 16, 2020, from 
https://www.highsnobiety.com/p/under-armour-hovr-launch/ 
Hoffman JR, Tenenbaum G, Maresh CM, Kraemer WJ. Relationship between athletic 
performance tests and playing time in elite college basketball players. J Strength Cond Res, 
1996; 10: 67-s, from 
https://content.sciendo.com/configurable/contentpage/journals$002fhukin$002f68$002f1$
002farticle-p223.xml#j_hukin-2019-0067_ref_011_w2aab2b8d106b1b7b1ab2b1c11Aa 
Jane, A. (2018, January 30). Material Matters: Nike React Vs. adidas BOOST. Retrieved 
November 17, 2020, from https://www.sneakerfreaker.com/features/material-
matters/material-matters-nike-react-vs-adidas-boost?page=0 
Jenkins, S. (1997, July 3). History of Women's Basketball. Retrieved October 26, 2020, from 
https://www.wnba.com/news/history-of-womens-basketball/ 
Jordan Air Jordan XXXIV Basketball Shoes. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 2020, from 
https://www.dickssportinggoods.com/p/jordan-air-jordan-xxxiv-basketball-shoes-
20nikmjrdnxxxvblknke/20nikmjrdnxxxvblknke 
KD13 Basketball Shoe. Nike.com. (n.d.). Retrieved November 03, 2020, from 
https://www.nike.com/t/kd13-chill-basketball-shoe-kbKpNV/CI9948-900 
Demby 21 
 
   
 
Kobe V Protro '5x Champ' Release Date. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 2020, from 
https://www.nike.com/launch/t/kobe-v-protro-5x-champ 
Kyrie 6 (Team) Basketball Shoe. Nike.com. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 2020, from 
https://www.nike.com/t/kyrie-6-team-basketball-shoe-vRtNQT/CK5869-001 
LaBella, C. R., Huxford, M. R., Grissom, J., Kim, K. Y., Peng, J., & Christoffel, K. K. (2011). 
Effect of neuromuscular warm-up on injuries in female soccer and basketball athletes in 
urban public high schools: cluster randomized controlled trial. Archives of pediatrics & 
adolescent medicine, 165(11), 1033–1040. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.168 
LeBron 17 Basketball Shoe. Nike.com. (n.d.). Retrieved November 02, 2020, from 
https://www.nike.com/t/lebron-17-basketball-shoe-6LSXgh/BQ3177-002 
List of NBA Players who have their own Signature Shoes. (n.d.). Retrieved October 29, 2020, 
from https://www.allaboutbasketball.us/nba/list-of-nba-players-who-have-their-own-
signature-shoes.html 
Lock, P., & 12, F. (2020, February 12). Basketball: Number of participants U.S. 2018. Retrieved 
November 02, 2020, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/191632/participants-in-
basketballl-in-the-us-since-2006/ 
Lynn, J. (2012, March 15). Over 26 Million Americans Play Basketball. Retrieved November 02, 
2020, from https://www.sfia.org/press/433_Over-26-Million-Americans-Play-Basketball 
MacMillan, C. (2020, February 14). Are ACL Tears Really More Common in Women? 
Retrieved November 11, 2020, from https://www.yalemedicine.org/stories/sports-injuries-
gender/ 
McClay, I. S., Robinson, J. R., Andriacchi, T. P., Frederick, E., Gross, T., Martin, P., Valiant, G., 
Williams, K. R., & Cavanagh, P. R. (1994). A Profile of Ground Reaction Forces in 
Professional Basketball, Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 10(3), 222-236. Retrieved Nov 
24, 2020, from https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/jab/10/3/article-p222.xml 
Mirabella, L. (2018, December 16). Under Armour and other brands' basketball shoes rarely, if 
ever, named for female athletes. Retrieved October 29, 2020, from 
https://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-womens-basketball-shoes-under-armour-
20181130-story.html 
Motawi, W. (2017, October 24). 4D knit Flyknit™ shoe construction. Retrieved from 
https://sneakerfactory.net/sneakers/2017/10/4d-knitting-flyknit-shoe-construction/ 
NCAA.com. (2018, April 13). 2018 Women's Final Four makes history in Columbus. Retrieved 
November 30, 2020, from https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-women/article/2018-04-
13/2018-womens-final-four-makes-history-columbus 
Newcomb, T. (2015, December 02). Detailed process fuels NBA flooring process. Retrieved 
November 24, 2020, from https://www.si.com/nba/2015/12/02/nba-hardwood-floors-
basketball-court-celtics-nets-magic-nuggets-hornets 
Demby 22 
 
   
 
Nike Air Zoom BB NXT Basketball Shoe. Nike.com. (n.d.). Retrieved November 03, 2020, from 
https://www.nike.com/t/air-zoom-bb-nxt-basketball-shoe-LwXlsl/CK5707-
100?nikemt=true 
National Institutes of Health Medicine Plus. An Athlete's Nightmare: Tearing the ACL. 
Accessed August 7, 2013 
Pettitt, R. W., ATC, CSCS; Bryson, E. R. (2002). Training for Women’s Basketball: A 
Biomechanical Emphasis for Preventing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury. Strength and 
Conditioning Journal, 24(5), 20-29. doi:https://journals.lww.com/nsca-
scj/Citation/2002/10000/Training_for_Women_s_Basketball__A_Biomechanical.6.aspx 
PG 4 Basketball Shoe. Nike.com. (n.d.). Retrieved November 03, 2020, from 
https://www.nike.com/t/pg-4-basketball-shoe-tszRns/CD5079-100 
Ransone, J., PhD ATC. (2017, February). Physiologic Profile of Basketball Athletes. Retrieved 
November 05, 2020, from https://www.gssiweb.org/sports-science-
exchange/article/physiologic-profile-of-basketball-athletes 
Reina, M., Garcia-Rubio, J., Pino-Ortega, J., &amp; Ibanez, S. J. (2019). The Acceleration and 
Deceleration Profiles of U-18 Women’s Basketball Players during Competitive Matches. 
Special Issue Assessment and Development of Change of Direction Speed and Agility), 
7(165). Retrieved November 10, 2020, from https://www.mdpi.com/2075-
4663/7/7/165#cite. 
Riezebos, M., Paterson, D., Hall, C., &amp; Yuhasz, M. (1983). Relationship of selected 
variables to  performance in women's basketball. [Abstract]. Canadian Journal of Applied 
Sport Sciences, 34- 40. doi:https://europepmc.org/article/med/6850975 
Trninić, S & Dizdar, D. (2000). System of the Performance Evaluation Criteria Weighted per 
Positions in the Basketball Game. Collegium antropologicum. 24. 217-34. 
WNBA Advanced Stats. (2020). Retrieved November 28, 2020, from 
https://stats.wnba.com/teams/ 
Women's Basketball: Probability of competing beyond high school. (2020, April 20). Retrieved 
November 02, 2020, from http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/research/womens-
basketball-probability-competing-beyond-high-school 
Women of Troy. (2020, February 20). Retrieved November 10, 2020, from 
https://www.hbo.com/documentaries/women-of-troy 
UA Unisex Embiid One Basketball Shoes. (n.d.). Retrieved November 03, 2020, from 
https://www.underarmour.com/en-us/p/basketball/unisex-ua-embiid-one-basketball-
shoes/3023086.html?start=0 
University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority. (n.d.). Understanding Anterior 
Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Injuries. Retrieved November 11, 2020, from 
Demby 23 
 
   
 
https://www.uwhealth.org/sports-medicine/clinic/understanding-anterior-cruciate-
ligament-acl-injuries/13064 
Zelisko JA, Noble HB, Porter M. A comparison of men's and women's professional basketball 
injuries. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 1982 Sep-Oct;10(5):297-299. DOI: 
10.1177/036354658201000507. 
Ziv, G., Lidor, R. Physical Attributes, Physiological Characteristics, On-Court Performances and 
Nutritional Strategies of Female and Male Basketball Players. Sports Med 39, 547–568 
(2009). https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200939070-00003 
 
  
Demby 24 
 
   
 
APPENDIX A – MARKET ANALYSIS & SWOT ANALYSIS 
Guard Position Shoes – Men
Nike Kyrie 7 
MSRP:$130 
Features & Benefits 
- Curved Nike Air Zoom Turbo Unit under the forefoot provides responsive cushioning 
- lightweight foam midsole 
- Molded fins in lacing system lock down foot 
- Traction pattern extends up the shoe's sidewall to provide more grip during cutting 
movements 
- Mesh forefoot is lightweight and breathable 
- Reinforced toe resists abrasion (Kyrie, n.d.) 
Nike Kobe V Protro 
MSRP: $180 
Features & Benefits 
- Nike Air Zoom Turbo unit provides responsive cushioning 
- Padded collar and heel counter offer locked-in stability 
- Minimalistic upper is lightweight and durable 
- Split outsole provides unlimited traction 
- Cushion foam provides liehtweieht support 
- Perforated tongue and toe box comfortably support the foot (Kobe, n.d.) 
adidas Dame 7 
MSRP: $110 
Features & Benefits 
- Lightstrike is a superlight cushioning with t raction for explosive movement 
- A rubber outsole provides outstanding traction 
Ultra-lightweight texti le upper w ith allover graphic (adidas, n.d.) 
Under Armour Curry 7 
MSRP: $140 
Features & Benefits 
- UA HOVR'M technology returns energy to get you w here you're going faster 
- Micro G® cushioning keeps your first step & every cut more explosive 
- Flexible plate adds support & stabil ity to every move 
- Decoupled heel for more natural motion to help stabilize the foot 
- Rubber outsole uses herringbone traction pattern to provide maximum grip (UA, n.d.) 
 
Demby 25 
 
   
 
Post Position Shoes – Men
Nike LeBron 17 
MSRP:$200 
Features & Benefits 
- KnitPosite upper provides durable yet lightweight support 
- The largest heel Max Air unit to date absorbes more force t han previous designs 
- Maximum-volume Zoom Air units under forefoot provide quick responsiveness 
- Soft foam pod directly under Max Air unit adds heel cushioning 
- Stabilizing plastic clip wraps around heel to lock in foot (LeBron, n.d.) 
Air Jordan 34 
MSRP: $180 
Features & Benefits 
- Visible Zoom Air cushioning under the heel and forefoot has a spr ingy, responsive feel 
- Eclipse plate made from molded TPU that is hollowed out reducing the shoe's weight 
- Mix of textiles and translucent materials for a lightweight, breathable upper 
- Herringbone outsole offers multidirectional traction (Jordan, n.d.) 
Under Armour Embiid One 
MSRP: $120 
Features & Benefits 
- Lightweight textile upper w ith open-hole mesh for ultimate breathabil ity 
- TPU wing provides superior midfoot lockdown & enhanced lateral stability 
- Die-cut EVA sockliner provides underfoot cushioning & support 
- Micro G® foam midsole turns cushioned landings int o explosive takeoffs 
- Rubber outsole w ith unique t raction pattern for lateral movements & gr ip (UA, n.d.) 
Jordan "Why Not?" Zer0.3 
MSRP:$130 
Features & Benefits 
- Air Zoom Turbo unit in t he front of t he shoe is curved to fol low the foot's natural shape 
- adjustable midfoot strap fastens in one flu id motion to keep foot locked in and stable 
- The rubber outsole is split into 2 sections to help reduce weight 
- Multidirectional t raction helps you stay in control (Jordan, n.d.) 
 
Demby 26 
 
   
 
All-Around Position Shoes – Men
NikeKD13 
MSRP: $150 
Features & Benefits 
- Full-length Nike Air Zoom cushion stitched directly to the upper provides max energy return 
- Second Air Zoom unit stacked under the forefoot for ultra-responsive cushion 
- Soft upper constructed from minimal materials provides a lightweight, broken-in feel 
- Midsole cutouts reduce weight and enhance flexibil ity (KD13, n.d.) 
Nike PG4 
MSRP:$110 
Features & Benefits 
- Ultralightweight footbed made w ith Nike Air runs the entire length of the shoe 
- Dual-mesh, semi-transparent zippered overlay fastens over the laces to provide supportive 
containment and ideal breathability 
- A low-cut collar, full bootie construction, and interna l webbing system provides an easy 
entry, plush comfort, and secure fit (PG4, n.d.) 
adidas Harden Vol. 4 
MSRP:$130 
Features & Benefits 
- Ultralight Lightstrike cushioning in the midsole creates explosive movement 
- Innovative rubber outsole provides excellent t raction 
- Midfood lockdown band holds foot in place 
- Textile upper is lightweight and comfortable (adidas, n.d.) 
adidas Harden Stepback 
MSRP:$80 
Features & Benefits 
- Ergonomic lacing system provides snug, all-day comfort 
- Bounce cushioning is lightweight and flexible, enhancing your on-court comfort 
- Textile upper with synthetic toe cap 
- Supergrip rubber outsole (adidas, n.d.) 
 
Demby 27 
 
   
 
Women’s Shoes
UA Women's UA HOVR'"' Breokthru 
MSRP:$110 
Features & Benefits 
- Breathable mesh upper with strategic support films, designed specific to women 
- Half-bootie construction with molded collar for a comfortable fit & support 
- 30 molded sockliner for underfoot cushioning & support 
- UA HOVR™ technology provides 'zero gravity feel' to maintain energy return 
- Compression mesh Energy Web contains & molds UA HOVR'"' foam for maximum cushion 
(UA, n.d.) 
Nike Air loom BB NXT 
MSRP:$180 
Features & Benefits 
- Three layers of Nike React foam consist of two foyers in the midsole and a sock liner 
- Two loom units under the boll of the foot help absorb energy in every step 
- Mesh utilizes reinforced layers to create support around the toe, heel and midfoot 
- The circular outso/e pattern provides traction for multidirectional movements 
- A plush foam tongue ond padded collar with a notch to support the Achilles tendon for a 
snug, comfortable fit (Nike, n.d.) 
Nike Kyrie 6 "Asia Irving" 
MSRP:$140 
Features & Benefits 
- Curved Nike Air Zoom Turbo Unit under the forefoot provides responsive cushioning 
- lightweight foam midsole 
- Adjustable strap locks down foot 
- Traction pattern extends up the shoe's sidewa ll to provide more grip 
- Mesh forefoot is lightweight and breathable 
- Reinforced toe resists abrasion (Kyrie, n.d.) 
Nike Air loom UNVRS FlyEase 
MSRP:$160 
Features & Benefits 
- FlyEase technology works with a magnetized heel that folds down and connects to the 
midsole, opening up the back of the shoe so you can slide your foot in without hands 
- Articulated strap is connected to Flywire cables that lock the upper down over your foot 
with one upward pull 
- Full-length Nike Air loom cushioning is stitched directly to the shoe's upper 
- Re-engineered Flyknit construction is lightweight, breathable and supportive 
(Nike, n.d.) 
 
 
 
  
Demby 28 
 
   
 
SWOT ANALYSIS 
Guard Position Shoes – Men 
Product Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats 
Nike Kyrie 7 Superior cushioning Shoe is a little heavy Could be made in There are lighter shoes on the 
responsiveness and different cuts (high market 
traction and low tops) 
Nike Kobe V Incredibly comfortable Very little ankle stability. Kobe shoes are Kobe shoes are exclusive and 
Proto and responsive guard shoe Typically run narrow currently in high difficult to find. Fit is narrow 
demand and doesn’t accommodate wide 
feet.  
Adidas Dame 7 great traction and Textiles used in upper feel Create a low-top Saturated market for guard-
cushioning system cheap and have poor version with better- specific shoes 
ventilation ventilating upper 
material 
UA Curry 7 Great traction on any Cushioning is too firm and Elevate upper and Materials are cheaper than other 
surface provides little impact midsole materials sneakers on the market at the 
protection same price point 
 
Post Position Shoes – Men  
Product Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats 
Nike Lebron 17 The largest Air Max unit Poor traction. Knitposite has Iterate a lighter version High pricepoint ($200) makes 
in existence creates great poor ventilation of the Knitposite upper this the most expensive shoe on 
cushioning. Knitposite the market 
upper is very durable 
Air Jordan 34 Traction pattern works Materials are not premium Use deluxe upper High pricepoint ($180) and non-
very well. Cushioning is materials focusing on traditional Jordan aesthetic 
lightweight. Very foot lockdown to 
lightweight. Eclipse plate respond to the traction 
in midfoot provides pattern 
stability 
UA Embiid 1 Great support, breathable Slightly heavy, outsole is Elevate all aspects of Outperformed by other shoes in 
materials not durable, cheap materials the shoe. Good shoe the market 
for lower price point 
Jordan “Why Zoom Air unit provides Poor lateral traction. Cheap Recreate traction Aesthetic does not look 
Not?” Zer0.3 less bulky cushion upper materials pattern  premium  
 
  
Demby 29 
 
   
 
All – Around Shoes - Men 
Product Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats 
Nike KD 13 Comfortable full-length Thin, flimsy materials Provide more stability Fit is narrow and doesn’t 
cushioning via stacked in the upper accommodate wide feet 
Zoom Air and wide base. 
Great traction on any 
surface 
Nike PG4 Great cushioning system Poor lateral support and Affordable, basic Saturated market for guard 
and circular traction lockdown, inconsistent sneaker shoes.  
pattern sizing 
Adidas Harden Lightstrike cushioning is Absence of Boost Multiple colorways Not as technologically advanced 
Vol. 4 responsive and cushioning and upper material as other shoe offerings 
lightweight choices 
Adidas Harden Very stable and Midsole is very firm Good sneaker at lower Basic aesthetic design 
Stepback supportive resulting in minimal price point 
cushioning 
 
Women’s Shoes 
Product Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats 
UA HOVR Women’s specific fit, Low top provides little Only women’s specific Small market size may have 
Breakthru great cushioning via ankle stability shoe in the market poor sales  
midsole HOVR energy 
web system 
Nike Air Zoom Pattern provides great Poor lateral stability due to One of the most high- Very high pricepoint 
BB NXT multi-directional traction high cushioning tech shoes in the 
and double-stacked react market 
and zoom air provide 
great cushioning 
Nike Kyrie 6 Great support and Runs slightly small Great storytelling in Exclusive sizing 
“Asia Irving” lockdown from Nike marketing  
Zoom Turbo cushioning 
and upper strap 
Nike Air Zoom Comfortable full-length Poor traction and heel Adaptive-friendly Poor elite basketball 
UNVRS FlyEase Zoom strobel and lockdown due to lacing basketball shoe performance 
adaptive FlyEase lacing system 
system 
 
  
Demby 30 
 
   
 
APPENDIX B – PATENT LANDSCAPE 
Relevant patents in this area include innovations related to female fit and cushioning. 
Cushioning Systems 
• Shoe with lattice structure (U.S. Patent No. 10470520B2) 
• Footwear midsole with lattice structure formed between platforms (U.S. Patent No. 
20200281310A1) 
• Sole and Shoe (U.S. Patent No. 20200329812A1) 
• Sole for a Shoe (U.S. Patent No. 20200329809A1) 
• Fluid-filled chamber with a stabilization structure (U.S. Patent No. 20200221822A1) 
• Sole structure for article of footwear (U.S. Patent No. 20200329810A1) 
• Stacked cushioning arrangement for sole structure (U.S. Patent No. 20200281311A1) 
• Footwear Arch Support (U.S. Patent No. 20200214388A1) 
 
Outsole 
• Articles of Footwear and Sole Structures for Articles of Footwear (U.S. Patent No. 
20190142108A1) 
 
Upper 
• Articles of footwear and apparel having a partially fused fabric portion and methods of 
making the same (U.S. Patent No. 20200324499A1) 
• Article of footwear incorporating a knitted component with an integral knit ankle cuff 
(U.S. Patent No. 20200315284A1) 
• Woven footwear upper with integrated tensile strands (U.S. Patent No. 20200329818A1) 
• Article of Apparel with Zonal Force Attenuation Properties (U.S. Patent No. 
20200281315A1) 
• Article with Directional Tensioning (U.S. Patent No. 20200268105A1) 
• Lightweight knitted upper and methods of manufacture (U.S. Patent No. 
20200329816A1) 
• Shoe upper (U.S. Patent No. D696853S1) 
• Footwear Designing Tool (U.S. Patent No. 0366293A1) 
 
Lacing 
• Dynamic lacing system (U.S. Patent No. 20200268094A1)  
  
Demby 31 
 
   
 
APPENDIX C – PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 
There are various ways my “Strengths Finder” strengths of harmony, focus, competition, 
significance, and individualization will shine through in this project. “Harmony”, or my ability to 
work well with people will be employed during the testing and research phase when I am 
working with athletes to collect data. My “focus” strength will keep me on task and driven for 
the duration of this capstone project. Lastly, “competition”, “significance”, and 
“individualization” each address my goal of increasing representation in women’s sports through 
basketball shoes.  
Additionally, my strengths as an innovator are rooted in research and technical problem solving. 
These assets will be recruited when addressing the biomechanical aspects of the project, 
specifically the injury components. This capstone project addresses my desire to work in female-
specific sports product and high-performance basketball footwear in the sport product industry. 
The course of the project will not only provide me with biomechanical human testing experience 
but also footwear development and making skills needed in the industry.  
 
Mentor Mapping 
Reuben Bligh: adidas Senior Manager, Future Footwear Innovation 
That sounds great to me, an hour should be fine. 
Once you have a date/time in mind, please let me know and we can book something in. 
Kind regards, 
Reuben Bligh 
Senior Manager, Future Footwear Innovation 
 
 
Shannon Pomeroy: Nike Explore Team, Applied Product Connection 
Shannon Pomeroy 
Mon 11/16/2020 10:25 PM 
To: Nicole Demby 
Hey Nicole, 
Great to see t hat you 're sticking with your guns here. Would love to work w ith you more in-depth where I 
can. Let 's chat again early December if that works? Feel free to send anything through in the meantime for 
research/what you're thinking! Hope you're doing well, all t hings considered. 
Shannon  
 
 
Demby 32 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PHASE II: TESTING & IDEATION 
WINTER 2021 
 
 
 
 
  
Demby 33 
 
   
 
 
Table of Contents 
 
TESTING ................................................................................................................................................... 35 
Benchmark Field Research Planning .......................................................................................................... 35 
Benchmark Product Performance Research Plan ........................................................................................ 39 
Testing Documents………………………………………………………….……………………………42 
Benchmark Testing Findings…………………………………………….……………………….……….45 
Under Armour HOVR Breakthru Test Questionnaire & Findings………………….……………………48 
Consumer Research Questionnaire & Findings…………………………………………………………...50 
 
IDEATION PLANNING .......................................................................................................................... 53 
Detailed SWOT ........................................................................................................................................... 53 
Functional Ideation Plan ............................................................................................................................. 58 
Aesthetic Ideation Plan……………………………………………………………………………………62 
Material Resourcing Plan………………………………………………………………………………….63 
Ideation Plan Timeline……………………………………………………………………………………67 
 
IDEATION……………………………………………………………………………………………….68 
Last Specifications………………………………………………………………………………………...68 
Sketching Ideation…………………………………………………………………………………………68 
Prototyping………………………………………………………………………………………………70 
Technology Integration……………………………………………………………………………………72 
Final Concepts……………………………………………………………………………………………..75 
Testing Validation…………………………………………………………………………………………77 
 
 
  
Demby 34 
 
   
 
TESTING 
 
BENCHMARK FIELD RESEARCH PLANNING 
 
@&[l::!]~[]={]~!% !?D&l1@ u&~uD{l::!]@ 
~~~, 
SPD Capstone Project Nicole Demby 
 
Demby 35 
 
   
 
REASONING 
Female athletes are Bx more likely than male athletes to tear their ACL while playing basketball 
(MacMillan, 2020) 
70% of these ACL injuries occur from non-contact situations such as jumping, cutting, and shuffling 
(University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics Authority, n.d.) 
3 main reasons that place female athletes at heightened risk for ACL tear are: landing from jumps flat 
footed, incorrect knee alignment, and poor muscle recruitment during athletic movements. 
PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS TO TEST 
Plantar Loading (GRFs}, Knee valgus angle, and muscle recruitment 
TESTING METHODS 
The test goal is to obseve the effects ofa rch support and specific female fit on these characteristics. 
To do this, each athlete will perform the following tests in three different pairs of shoes: men's basketball 
shoes (their own}, women's running shoes (their own}, UA HOVR Breakthru Women's basketball shoes 
TEST SUBJECTS 
Testing will be performed on members of the Montezuma-Cortez High School Women's basketball team 
Women's Running Sttees 
Obseve the effects of arch support 
and female-specific shoe fit on 
plantar loading, knee valgus angle, 
and muscle recruitment during 
basketball-related movement. 
In each of the following tests, the subject will 
perform movements in their personal men's 
basketball shoes, personal women's running 
shoes, and provided UA HOVR Breakthru 
women's basketball shoes 
 
Demby 36 
 
   
 
SIGNIFICANCE 
Female athletes tend to have wider hips which result in a greater Q-angle and knee valgus angles 
Large knee valgus angles create poor limb alignment which weaken's the the lower leg's ability to stabilize the knee and 
channels increased load onto the ACL 
Can arch support and female-specific fit encourage correct knee alignment in female athletes? 
TESTING TOOL MOVEMENT TESTED 
20 Motion Capture - Frontal Plane Depth Jump 
DATA REPRESENTATION 
BarGroph 11 I 
I 
use /phone camera 
SIGNIFICANCE 
Female athletes are more likely to land flat-footed than male athletes 
Landing flat-footed from jumps creates Ground Reaction Forces (CRFs) as high as 6x an athlete's body weight 
Can arch support and female specific fit encourge safer landing in female athletes? 
TESTING TOOL MOVEMENT TESTED 
AR/ Pressure Insoles DATA REPRESENTATION DEPTH JUMP 
Pressure Map 
Simulate rebounding 
REACTIVE SHUTTLE RUN 
Simulate lateral cutting movement 
FULL COURT SPRINT 
Simulate longitudinal court movement 
  
Demby 37 
 
   
 
GOOGLE SHEETS QUESTIONNAIRE 
BASIC INFO UA HOVR BREAKTRHU 
-Name - How do these shoes compare to your other basketball 
shoes? (1-5) 
- Age 
- Height - Do you notice any differences in how these shoe fit 
compared to your current basketball shoes? If so, what are 
- Weight the differences7 
- Shoe Size - How do these shoes feel compared to your current 
- Basketball playing position running shoes? (1-5) 
- List any previous injuries - Do you notice any differences in how these shoe fit 
compared to your current running shoes7 If so, what are 
the differences7 
.~ · - Do you like the added arch support7 (Y/N) 
- Which shoe do you find most comfortable to wear? 
~ - Which shoe feels the most lightweight? 
PA•THERS - Do you like how the HOVR shoes look? (Y/N) 
- Would you buy these shoes for yourself? (Y/N) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 38 
 
   
 
BENCHMARK PRODUCT PERFORMANCE RESEARCH PLAN 
 
Phase of Study  Phase of Procedure Data Collected Timing 
Data 
Collection 
Data Collection Paperwork/ Subject reads and signs consent form Consent (name and signature) to 
(Subject is at background and photo release. participate in the study and have 
testing location) info pictures taken 5 min 
Subject fills out informational survey  Age, height, weight, shoe size, 
injury history, and basketball 
playing position 5 min 
Test 1: Plantar Subject places ARION Pressure insoles 
Loading GRF inside personal basketball shoes. 
Analysis System is turned on and test session NONE 2 min 
begun on phone app 
Subject performs “Depth Jump Test”: Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
- Subject steps off platform strike) data from 3 key points 
- Subject lands and jumps as during movement: 
high as possible (one - Initial landing 1 min 
movement) - Loading for jump 
- Subject lands - Second landing 
Subject performs “Reactive Shuttle Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
Run” agility test: strike) data from 4 key points 
- Subject starts in between two during movement: 
cones - Initial takeoff 
- When prompted, subject runs - Lateral cut #1 
to one cone, picks it up and - Sprint 
cuts laterally to run to the - Lateral cut #2 2 min 
second cone  
- Once the subject reaches the  
second cone they pick it up 
and laterally cut again to 
return to the starting point in 
the center 
Subject performs sprint test Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
- Subject starts at baseline strike) data from 3 key points 
- When prompted, subject during movement: 
sprints to half court - Initial takeoff 1 min 
- Sprint 
- Stop 
Subject places ARION Pressure Insoles 
inside personal running shoes.  NONE 2 min 
Subject performs “Depth Jump Test” Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
strike) data from 3 key points 
during movement: 1 min 
- Initial landing  
Demby 39 
 
   
 
- Loading for jump 
Second landing 
Subject performs "Reactive Shuttle Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
Run" agility test strike) data from 4 key points 
during movement: 
- Init ial takeoff 
2 min 
- Lateral cut #1 
- Sprint 
- Lateral cut #2 
Subject performs sprint test Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
strike) data from 3 key points 
during movement: 
1 min 
- Initial takeoff 
- Sprint 
- Stop 
Subject places ARION Pressure Insoles 
inside provided UA HOVR Breakthru NONE 2 min 
shoes 
Subject performs "Depth Jump Test" Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
strike) data from 3 key points 
during movement: 
1 min 
- Init ial landing 
- Loading for jump 
Second landing 
Subject performs "Reactive Shuttle Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
Run" agility test strike) data from 4 key points 
during movement: 
- Initial takeoff 
2 min 
- Lateral cut #1 
- Sprint 
- Lateral cut #2 
Subject performs sprint test Plantar loading (GRF and foot 
strike) data from 3 key points 
during movement: 
1 min 
- Initial takeoff 
- Sprint 
- Stop 
Test 2: Knee Place tape marker on subject's ankle 
Valgus Angle center, shin center (6 in. below 
2D Motion kneecap), patella center, and thigh NONE 7 min 
Analysis center (8 in. above kneecap) 
*Subject is still wearing UA HOVR shoe 
Set up iPhone video camera in front of 
NONE 2 min I 
test subject and begin recording 
 
Demby 40 
 
   
 
Have subject perform "Depth Jump Frontal plane video footage of 
Test" subject knee alignment during 
1 min 
j ump and landing wearing UA 
HOVR Shoe 
Have subject put on personal 
NONE 2min 
basketbal l shoes 
Subject performs "Depth Jump Test" Frontal plane video footage of 
subject knee alignment during 
1 min 
j ump and landing wearing men's 
basketball shoe 
Have subject put on personal running 
NONE 2min 
shoes 
Subject performs "Depth Jump Test" Frontal plane video footage of 
subject knee alignment during 
lmin 
j ump and landing wearing 
women's running shoe 
Post-Test - Subject fills out Consumer Subjective data on UA HOVR 
Questionnaire Research questionnaire on UA Breakthru aesthetic, fit, and 7min 
#1 HOVR Breakthru shoe comfort level 
Post-Test Subject fills out female-specific Subject data on preferred colors, 
Questionnaire basketbal l questionnaire patterns, and shoe fits 7min 
#2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 41 
 
   
 
TESTING DOCUMENTS 
 
Research Testing Flyer  (Provided to test subjects)
University of Oregon 
Sports Product Design 
Nicole Demby 
1/13/2021 
SENIOR TH ESIS PROJECT - BENCHMARK RESEARCH TESTING 
Have you ever wondered why there are no women's basketball shoes? Have you ever wondered why 
female at hletes are 8 t imes more likely to tear their ACL while playing than ma le athletes? Would you 
like to contribute to the future of women's basketball? Be a part of my research testing on Friday! 
W hat Is The Testing For: 
I am a graduate st udent at the University of Oregon studying Sports Product Design. For my fina l thesis 
project in the program, I am designing fema le-specific basketbal l shoes with the intent to optimize 
player performance and reduce likelihood of ACL tears in female basketball players. 
Test ing Goal: 
This resea rch will observe the effects of arch support and fema le-specific fi t on plantar loading, knee 
alignment, and muscle recruitment in fem a le athletes while doing basketball movement. 
Test Plan: 
In each of t he fo llowing tests, the athlete will perform movements in their personal basketba ll shoes, 
persona l runn ing shoes, and Under Armour HOVR Breakthru women' s basketba ll shoes (provided) 
Test 1: Plantar Loading (Ground Reaction Forces) - Using Pressure Insoles 
The athletes w ill perform 3 movements in in each pair of shoes fo r a tota l of 9 movements. 
The movements being performed are: 
• Depth Jump Test - to simulate rebounding 
• Reactive Shuttle Run - to simulate lateral cutting movement 
• Half Court Sprint - to simulate longitud inal court movement 
Test 2: Knee Alignment (Knee Valgus Angle) - Using 20 Motion Capture 
The athletes w ill perform t he Depth Jump Test in each pair of shoes for a tota l of 3 movements. 
THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING TO BE A PART OF MY STUDY AND PLEASE BRING YOUR BASKETBALL SHOES 
AND RUNN ING SHOES TO OPEN GYM ON FRIDAY! 
o I UNIVERSITY OF OREGON 
 
Demby 42 
 
   
 
 
Photo Release Form   (Provided to Test Subjects)
University of Oregon 
Sports Product Design 
Sen ior Thes is Project 
Nicole Demby 
1/13/2021 
Photograph ic Re lease Form 
As part of this research project, I will be tak ing photographs and video footage. Please 
init ial in the spaces below what uses of these photographs you consent to, and sign a t 
the end of the release form . Photos will only be used in the ways you consent to. Your 
name wi ll not be identified in these photos. 
1. ___  Photographs and video can be reviewed by the researcher. 
2. ___  Photographs can be used for project illust ra t ion . 
3. ___  Photographs can be used for academic present at ions . 
Name 
Signa ture 
Date 
o I UNIVERSITY OF OREGON 
 
Demby 43 
 
   
 
Testing Checklist 
 
Test subject: _________________________________________________________________ 
Personal Basketball Shoes 
 Time of day (Session started) Time (in app) Time (stopwatch) 
Agility    
Sprint    
Jump    
Personal Running Shoes 
 Time of day Time (in app) Time (stopwatch) 
Agility    
Sprint    
Jump    
UA HOVR Breakthru Shoes 
 Time of day Time (in app) Time (stopwatch) 
Agility    
Sprint    
Jump    
 
  
Demby 44 
 
   
 
BENCHMARK TESTING FINDINGS 
@g[j::[]©J{]~[K ~[j::[]@ 
~~~, 
SPD Capstone Project Nicole Demby 
 
~~~ ~(lj}{M]fMJ&glif 
- 4 test subjects 
- 3 movements 
(agility, sprint, &jump) 
-Jshoes 
(basketball, running, and UA HOVR) 
- 2 data captures 
(pressure insoles and video) 
 
Demby 45 
 
   
 
Plantar Loading Pressure Insole Findings 
~[1~ 
AGILITY SPRINT JUMP 
BASKETBALL SHOES 
ml l 
Cut/ Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
RUNNING SHOES 
II [E 
Cut I Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
UA HOVR SHOES 
11 
Cuti Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
 
~D~&[l:f] 
AGILITY SPRINT JUMP 
BASKETBALL SHOES 
II 
Cuti Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
RUNNING SHOES 
II 
Cuti Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
UA HOVR SHOES 
Cut/ Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
 
Demby 46 
 
   
 
&[Af][MJW 
AGILITY SPRINT JUMP 
BASKETBALL SHOES 
rl(I 
Cuti Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
RUNNING SHOES 
llrll 
Cuti Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
UA HOVR SHOES 
II 
Cuti Cut2 Phase I Phase2 Takeoff 
 
 
Knee Alignment 2D Motion Capture Data 
 
 
BASKETBALL SHOES RUNNING SHOES UA HOVR SHOES 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Angle Difference: Angle Difference: Angle Difference: 
 
Right Len Right Len Right Len 
 15.87° 24.44° 13.01° 8.1° 6.84 ° 16.89° 
Average Average Average 
 20.16° 10.56° 11.81° 
JUMP TEST KNEE VALGUS ANGLES 
BASKETBAll SHOES RUNNING SHOl S UA HOVR SHOES 
Phase 1 I Phase 2 ABS DIFFERENCE Phase 1 I Phase 2 ABS DIFFERENCE Phase 1 I Phase 2 ABS DIFFERENCE 
TmSUIJECT Ri11ht l c11 I Left Lc11 I Ri ht Lc11 I Left Lc11 Ri htle I Left Lc11 Ri11ht Le I Left Lc11. I Ri h t Lc11 I Ldt Le11 Ri11ht le I Left LCR Ri htle I Left Lcll I Ri11ht Lc11 I left Le Ri11htlc11 I left lc11 
EMILY 4.23 -4.23 20.1 20 .2 1 15.87 24.44 -16.78 -4 .03 -3.77 4.07 13.01 8.1 -2.11 0 4.73 16.89 6.84 16.89 
KALE:A -14.92 2.7S -14.97 -3.12 0.05 5.87 -6.42 -2.49 3.83 3.93 3.83 -14.12 -9 .04 4.16 5.08 4.16 
SIREN 4.85 6.03 9 .69 8 .9 4.84 2.87 1.92 -7.8 5 7.0 7 -4 .01 5.15 3.84 -1.85 1.95 10.79 11.58 12.64 9.63 
EM MY -8 .36 -15.7 -6.75 -SA 1.61 7.3 -18.33 -8.47 -11.9 -1.43 6.43 7.04 -20.91 -22.5 -13 .09 -l7.74 7.82 4.76 
5.59 10.12 7.13 5.70 8.10 8.86 
7.86 6.42 8.48 
Demby 47 
 
   
 
Under Armour HOVR Breakthru Test Questionnaire & Findings 
Age 
4 responses 
Name 
4 responses 
Kalea Hunt 
Siren Utecht 
Emmy 
16 25 32 
Emily Walck 
                           
Height 
4responses 
Shoe Size (women's) 
5'0" 4 responses 
5'2 
. 5 
5•9• .• 65.5  
5'5" 
.• 76.5  
• 7.5 
Weight e s 
3 responses 
• 8.5 
110 1bs 112 T 
175 
130  
 
List any previous or current injuries             
3 responses Basketball Playing Position 
 4 responses 
Sprain ACL 
Pul led muscle  e Guard 
e Forward 
ACL 
 e Center 
What basketball shoes do you currently wear?  
3 responses 
                         
Under Armour 
Jordans  
Under Armor (little boys high top shoe) 
Demby 48 
 
   
 
Did you notice any differences in how the shoes fit compared to your current basketball shoes? If 
How did these shoes fit and feel compared to your current basketball shoes? 
so. what are the differences? 
3 responses 
4 responses 
The arches are higher 
The arch was higher than my shoes 
They were more snug with much better arch support. 
More arch support and didn't feel as stif f. 0(0%) 0 (0%) 0(0%) 
 
 
How did these shoes fit and feel compared to your current running shoes? 
Did you notice any differences in how the shoes fit compared to yoor current running shoes? If so. 4 responses 
what are the differences? 
4 rcsoons cs 
More snug 
The same thing was lhe arch 
Being a low top shoe, It st ill felt like it ga~e plenty of ankle support. I felt that there were more space In the toe 
section of the shoe as well. 0(0%) 0(0%) 
A bit looser than my runnm~ shoes, I l ike having my running shoes fit very snug to the top o f my foot. 
 
 
Did you like the added arch support? 
4 responses Which shoe felt like it had the most cushioning during the jump test? 
3 responses 
e My current basketban shoes 
e My current running shoes 
e Under Armour HOVR Bteakthru shoes 
C(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 0(0%) 
 
 
 
Which shoe felt the most stable during the agility test? 
3 responses  Which shoe felt the most lightweight during the sprint test? 
3 responses 
• My currenl basketball shoes  
• My current running shoes e My current basketball shoes 
• Under Armour HOVR Breakthl'\J shoes  e My current running shoes 
• Ullder Armour HOVR Bteakthru fflOeS 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 49 
 
   
 
Which shoe felt the most comfortable overall?  
3responses  
e My current basketball shoes 
e  My curren1 running shoes 
e Under Armour HOVR Breakthru shoes  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONSUMER RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE & FINDINGS 
 
Age 
 31 responses 
  MC Smith 6(19_4%) 
EmilyGutrrij 
 "'"' 
NatHaber 
C•mer,n Booller 
 
Siren l.kecnt 
14 15 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 32 
 EnvnyHal~ 
 
 Height 
31 responses 
  
3 (9.7%) 
2(6.5%) 2 (6.!2'(6.5%) 
1 (3.~11/(3.LH(3 .. Z1V(3.L1{(3.LH(3.~11/(3.LH(3.2%) ~ (3.2.11,(3.~11/(3.2.11,(3.2%) 
1 
5 foot 1 5'6" 5' 6" s·o· 5'11 5·4· ST 5·9· 6' 6T 6'3" 
Weight 
30 responses 
2(6.7%) 2 (6.12((6.7%) 2(6.7%) 
1 (3.,1V(3.,H(3.,11(3.,H(3.3%) 1 (3.,H(3.,H(3.,1V(3.,H(3.3%) 1 (3.3%) I (3.,H(3.,H(3.o11(3.,H(3.o11/(3.,H(3.3~ 
110 115 122 1321bs 142 144 155 170 188 198 205 74 kg 
Demby 50 
 
   
 
Shoe Size (women's) List any pre·, ous or cu-rent injur ies 
27 responses ., 2~rem o1ses ...• ,,55  .,   1 (3. •1 '(3.1p.1'(3.l '::,. •<,:3 1'(3. •1 '{3.1-(3.1'(3.J'(:,_5q., • (3 1'(3 1"(3.1'(3.l'(:,. .i, :3.' ' !3 1'( l .1'{l 1'(3.l'(:0.J ' :3. ' '!3 1'( l ,1'{l61 1 
• 7.5 
•e •BS  
).CL Elrohlnhand FCL te~ :n d '1'111/li;cui:___ Spraii ed ark11 (~ :I• i:orar»:lanl:IG, p akl 
A.=tlil K n nC'ir ik, !--lip.. KnH w •oe,ry on my t i . .. SM•.rl~ r latn.m f ll~EfJ T:>m n~ri~~ in b:>tl . . 
Basketball Playing Position Wt1::1l llG~lb:111: ilK.:t~ do you ;;LUrt11Uy A'ti:11 ? 
31 responses J I re~po,ses 
• Gua1d 
e FOfW.srd 
• Center 
KCVWI Cir:rll ►:}ril~ Nike Ky:>rid S4 tGr~ Under ,Wour dill!~ 
KO rV!fS- t iz~ • • --- K,rM2 Lc,,,,s (; iz. 1 \lhM ~~t Ni:9 t y:>« t\n ls 19bfcn , :ildiQo•, kd13 
Highest level of play? (ex: highschool, College - 01. 02. . 03, etc.) 
29resp<>nse6 
100 Do yoo have a d iffi:::Lllt ti rre ' inding t:asketball shoE,s for youmal"? 
75 
50 
25 
College gym dass Does that c High School Prol0S!>ional 
Collage 01 01 High school • 
 
Woukl you buy • female-specific basketball shoe If II was offered? Which style of shoes do ycu ::>refer? 
J l respcns?s  
• Hl!)hlQ>S 
e Lov, tops 
e Mid (somewtiere in betwten)  
   
Areyou,current bnkelbe>lshoescomfcxleble?  
Which colc-rway co you chocse when buying b asketball shoes?  
31 respcns~s 
e Team colcrs 
• Basic Colors (bli dl. orev. & Mite) 
• l'"Cllllini'u~col:)(s; 
. Brigltwlor5 
• !pectal caoo.ays n at mean sanetn1ng 
oem.mDeacnc01no:y1 
Do yow feet ffVll!f hd'tat the end of pracUce ex Qlll'All!S? If so, where? e UsLBl~· ju;t agenericalt ola :kshoe 
e Currently ::hoosng ba; ic to ma:chwi1h 
lean bJI 1Vould prelerbri,~hllfemin ne 
e i- roc-aru colas 
·••$)·---'·°"-""-"ol-
What Is your favorite basket ball snoe 
e tl ik11 KyrK7 
What Is the most lmportanl thing to ,o., when you are buyln<,J besketball shoes? 
e , or<lan 11 
____. .._,. _  .. • mu Kooe 5 Prouo ....,. • tlike Kobe Mant>a Fu-y 
__ ,__,,r...,.,. • tl ike tu Zoom &B J,lXT 
• • Plih H,Tlf'rrlun1c::inu 1 • Ad idai D•m• 7 e Adida~ H~«:len '/ol.4 ' IJ T 
Demby 51 
 
   
 
Why Is this your favorite shoe; 
Do you like the colors th . 
31responses . 31 responses ey come in? 
Low to the groul'ld so very responsiv 
Kanodb el ast and also very comfortable e al'ld low risk of ankle roll, but has z oom c,shlOnlog llghtw~ght 
I • Yes • rd buy one ol ltlese COiors • Not realty • I wish the better colorways re were some • I'm Indifferent 
Female Empowerment aH the way11 
a good guard shoe, has wrap around outsole 
High top and simple design 
I have always liked hyperlinks growmg up 
Cool colors but not too out there in silhouette 
I bke how they IOOk 
Which colorway is your favorite' 
tt ls more colorful al'ld different 
31 responses • 
r OVR Breakthn.J Shoe 
• Blad< 
• Navy 
Do you like how the Under Armou 
32 responses r shoes look? . While 
• Grey 
• Grey& Purple 
• Red& White 
• Red& B~d< 
Overall, would you buy the 
31 responses se shoes for yourself? 
O30 nre as psocnaseles  from 1-5 how c ool do you th ink they look compar e d to other basketball shoes? 
e ves 
" • No. my current shoes are cooler 
tO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 52 
 
   
 
 
IDEATION PLANNING 
 
DETAILED SWOT 
 
1. Benchmark Product: Under Armour HOVR Breakthru Women’s Basketball Shoe 
Women's UA HOVR~ Breakthru Q 
Basketball Shoes 
Stte:oo- $84.99 ***** 4.9 (7) 
White!White/Black· 100 
D FIOdYourTruenSize 
~ViewPl-<>tos{6)  
 
2. How can we implement female-specific support, stability, and cushioning within basketball 
footwear to optimize player performance and decrease ACL injury risk? 
 
3. Parts to be improved: shoe upper, sock liner, midsole, outsole 
 
4. “How could we” areas of improvement: support, stability, and cushioning 
More specifically: arch support, specific fit for stability, and lighter cushioning 
5. Query paths: Arch support, stability, and cushioning 
 
1. Arch Support Query Paths 
A. Shoe Upper / Arch Support 
i. What are the strengths of the shoe upper and arch support? 
Shoe upper is flexible and has “strategic support films” that hug the arch 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the shoe upper and arch support? 
Shoe upper connects directly into midsole and does not provide any dynamic arch support  
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the shoe upper and arch support? 
Integrate an arch activation system within the interface between the upper and midsole that 
helps arch rebound from impact and provides proprioceptive properties 
 
Create a tightening/lacing system that allows the user to adjust their level of arch 
support/pressure  
 
Demby 53 
 
   
 
Utilize a more tapered silhouette around arch area 
 
iv. What are the threats of the shoe upper and arch support? 
The HOVR model is basic and provides no dynamic arch support properties, making it less 
technically advanced than other shoes 
 
B. Sock liner / Arch Support 
i. What are the strengths of the sock liner and arch support? 
“3D molded sock liner for underfoot cushioning & support” (UA, n.d.) 
Has female-specific fit and arch support 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the sock liner and arch support? 
The sock liner provides arch support in the form of an insole (from the bottom up) rather 
than an activation system (From the top down).  
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the sock liner and arch support? 
Create a design that utilizes both the upper and sock liner to provide a dynamic arch 
rebound activation system. Also provide 
 
iv. What are the threats of the sock liner and arch support? 
Store-bought or orthopedic insoles that provide arch support 
Athletes with flat feet that find arch support uncomfortable 
 
C. Midsole / Arch Support 
i. What are the strengths of the midsole and arch support? 
Additional arch support shank within midsole 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the midsole and arch support? 
Shank is stiff and does not provide dynamic arch support. May be uncomfortable to users 
with flat feet 
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the midsole and arch support? 
Add additional cushioning specifically around the midsole region of some sort of more 
flexible foam/cushioning technology that caters to the movement of the arch 
 
iv. What are the threats of the midsole and arch support? 
Adding too much arch support can cause the shoe to lose stability. Need to find the best 
balance between arch support and stability. Streamlined design with minimal vertical bulk 
 
D. Outsole / Arch Support 
i. What are the strengths of the outsole and arch support? 
Outsole is slightly tapered around arch region 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the outsole and arch support? 
There is outsole material under the arch region that potentially goes unused and might be 
adding extraneous weight to the shoe 
 
Demby 54 
 
   
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the outsole and arch support? 
Subtract the arch region of the outsole from the shoe if it does not provide extra traction to 
the wearer. Study wear tests on basketball shoes to analyze if this traction region is 
necessary  
 
iv. What are the threats of the outsole and arch support? 
This outsole design adds unnecessary weight to the shoe and potentially makes it heavier 
than competitors on the market  
 
2. Stability Query Paths 
A. Shoe Upper / Stability 
i. What are the strengths of the shoe upper and stability? 
The shoe upper is a “breathable mesh upper with strategic support films, designed specific to 
the anatomy of the female hooper” 
The upper provides lightweight support for lateral movements 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the shoe upper and stability? 
The shoe upper is slightly bulky and has little reinforcement to the interface with the midsole 
with presents tear out risk during lateral cutting movements 
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the shoe upper and stability? 
Create a system like flywire that provides extremely lightweight lateral reinforcement. 
Another option is to add TPU film near the upper/midsole interface to create a stronger bond 
for better lateral stability 
 
Change silhouette/ ankle collar to provide better lateral stability 
 
iv. What are the threats of the shoe upper and stability? 
The shoe upper is basic and provides an average amount of stability but does not stand out 
among other products in the market 
 
B.    Sock liner / Stability 
i. What are the strengths of the sock liner and stability? 
Sock liner is 3D molded to enhance fit and reduce foot slip within the shoe 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the sock liner and stability? 
The sock liner construction is smooth and doesn’t provide lateral stability  
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the sock liner and stability? 
Add some form of texture or molding up the sidewalls to provide lateral stability and prevent 
the foot from slipping within the shoe 
 
iv. What are the threats of the sock liner and stability? 
Store-bought insoles can be bought to provide texture within the footbed 
 
C.   Midsole / Stability 
i. What are the strengths of the midsole and stability? 
Demby 55 
 
   
 
“Internal shank for extra midfoot stability” (UA, n.d.) 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the midsole and stability? 
Midsole is thick and does not provide a “close to ground feel” that is generally in guard-
specific shoes to promote stability during lateral movements 
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the midsole and stability? 
Utilize a thinner midsole with a different cushioning strategy that places the user closer to the 
ground 
 
iv. What are the threats of the midsole and stability? 
Nike technologies such as the KD’s “Nike Air Zoom” that are stitched directly into the upper 
or the Kyrie’s curved “Air Zoom Turbo” unit that allow more responsive court feel and 
heightened banking ability 
 
D.     Outsole / Stability 
i. What are the strengths of the outsole and stability? 
“Rubber outsole uses herringbone traction pattern to provide maximum floor control & grip” 
(UA, n.d.) 
The modified herringbone pattern provides superior traction 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the outsole and stability? 
The outsole has the same constant padding throughout the entire length of the foot and 
provides no specific zoning  
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the outsole and stability? 
Analyze outsole shoe wear among various shoes to determine the optimal traction zoning 
patter – add a circular pivot point under the forefoot and extended sidewalls  
 
iv. What are the threats of the outsole and stability? 
The HOVR Breakthru outsole is incredibly basic and lacks the individuality of other shoes 
found in the market 
 
3. Cushioning Query Paths 
A. Shoe Upper / Cushioning 
i. What are the strengths of the shoe upper and cushioning? 
The shoe upper is mesh with a “half bootie construction with molded collar for a comfortable 
fit & anatomically correct support”  
Shoe upper does not pertain to underfoot cushioning 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the shoe upper and cushioning? 
Shoe upper does not pertain to underfoot cushioning 
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the shoe upper and cushioning? 
Shoe upper does not pertain to underfoot cushioning 
 
iv. What are the threats of the shoe upper and cushioning? 
Demby 56 
 
   
 
Shoe upper does not pertain to underfoot cushioning 
 
B. Sock liner / Cushioning 
i. What are the strengths of the sock liner and cushioning? 
The sock liner provides an extra layer of cushioning to the shoe 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the sock liner and cushioning? 
Providing cushioning within the sock liner may be an inefficient way to provide cushioning 
and could potentially be adding extraneous bulk & weight 
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the sock liner and cushioning? 
Scrap the idea of a cushioned sock liner and instead add that weight and technology to the 
shoe’s midsole. Focus on the sock liner fitting the foot anatomically and providing arch 
proprioception instead 
 
iv. What are the threats of the sock liner and cushioning? 
This cushioned sock liner might make the shoe heavier but also less comfortable than other 
products on the market 
 
C.   Midsole / Cushioning 
i. What are the strengths of the midsole and cushioning? 
“UA HOVR™ technology provides 'zero gravity feel' to maintain energy return that helps 
eliminate impact” 
“Compression mesh Energy Web contains & molds UA HOVR™ foam to give back the 
energy you put in” 
Superior energy return and impact elimination for explosive movement 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the midsole and cushioning? 
Cushioning is stacked slightly higher than most basketball shoes which makes the shoe a little 
unstable 
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the midsole and cushioning? 
Utilize a super lightweight and flexible foam for female athletes who are an average of ~60 lbs 
lighter than male athletes to optimize speed and flexibility and prevent undue strain on lower 
limb (knee) joints 
 
iv. What are the threats of the midsole and cushioning? 
Proprietary technologies such as Nike Air Zoom units which are incredibly lightweight and 
responsive 
 
D. Outsole / Cushioning 
i. What are the strengths of the outsole and cushioning? 
The outsole is made of a soft rubber compound that promotes flexibility 
 
ii. What are the weaknesses of the outsole and cushioning? 
The outsole does not cover enough of the midsole sidewalls for agile players who spend time 
on the sides of their feet 
Demby 57 
 
   
 
 
iii. What are the opportunities of the outsole and cushioning? 
Explore traction patterns and rubber compounds that provide the optimal amount of traction 
and flexibility to the foot 
 
iv. What are the threats of the outsole and cushioning? 
Other shoe models such as the Nike Kyrie and Nike KD have more elevated outsole/midsole 
integrated systems than this shoe 
 
 
 
FUNCTIONAL IDEATION PLAN 
 
PRODUCT - Guard Shoe 
UPPER 
Problem Identification from research Ideation Path 
- Engineered knit 
- Sock-like feel 
SWOT Opportunity: More Lightweight / Less bulky - Reduce use of foam in ankle-collar 
- TPU films 
 
- Flywire system - minimal structure 
- TPU membranes 
SWOT Opportunity: Lateral Stability - Straps - Lacing system 
- Material Layering 
 
- 3D foot scanning 
- Wide forefoot area 
SWOT Opportunity: Female Fit - Female sport last 
- Stretchy upper material across forefoot 
 
- Integrate “arch activation system” within 
upper/midsole interface to promote arch 
activation and rebounding 
- Dynamic lacing system specifically for arch 
Benchmark and SWOT Opportunity: Arch Support - Dynamic tightening system specifically for 
arch: straps, Velcro, “burton speed pulls” 
- Boa-type tightening system  
- Rubber band suspension arch bridge 
 
Demby 58 
 
   
 
- Different lacing system to allow more room 
- Utilize thinner tongue material 
Benchmark Opportunity: Less bulky upper - Eliminate tongue – sock-like fit 
- Engineered knit  
 
- Dynamic arch rebounding system rather than 
Consumer Opportunity: Comfortable arch support static molded sockliner 
 
- Make guard shoe a low top 
- Design shoe specifically to female ankle 
anatomy to avoid unnecessary 
rubbing/pressure on medial malleolous 
- 3D foot scanning 
Consumer Opportunity: “We don’t like mid-cuts”  
- Make forward shoe a low top* 
- Make center shoe a high top ** 
- Use 3D foot scanning to ensure shoe cuts 
above medial malleolus  
- Lacing system for extra ankle stability  
 
PRODUCT - Guard Shoe 
SOCK LINER 
Problem Identification from research Ideation Path 
- Utilize cushioning system within sock liner to 
reduce midsole size (Nike Kobe zoom insoles) 
Benchmark Opportunity: Cushioning System  - Air zoom units 
- Foam cushioning (3D molded) 
 
- 3D molded sock liner in UA HOVR Breaktrhu is 
Consumer Opportunity: Enhance Comfort uncomfortable for many wearers - Reduce arch support within sock liner 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 59 
 
   
 
PRODUCT - Guard Shoe 
MIDSOLE 
Problem Identification from research Ideation Path 
- Flexible midsole shank 
SWOT Opportunity: Flexibility - Lightweight foam 
- Less dense foam 
- Utilize lightweight foam 
- Zoom units in sockliner 
- Streamline midsole cushioning design  
- Cutout under arch region – Lebron 15            
SWOT Opportunity: More Lightweight / Less bulky 
 
 
- Reallocate cushioning assets to reduce 
midsole thickness 
Benchmark Opportunity: Stability - Lower shoe closer to ground 
- Use thinner midsole foam 
 
- Streamline midsole cushioning 
Benchmark Opportunity: Less bulky - Reallocate cushioning assets into sock liner to provide ‘closer to ground’ feel  
 
- Create more responsive feel 
- Use firmer foam 
Benchmark Opportunity: Make position specific - Use thinner amount of foam of same density 
- Add slight heel flare  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 60 
 
   
 
PRODUCT - Guard Shoe 
OUTSOLE 
Problem Identification from research Ideation Path 
- Increase surface area of outsole 
SWOT Opportunity: Traction - Add lateral and medial extended outrigger 
(Nike Kyrie series) 
- Female loading patterns 
SWOT Opportunity: Female specific - Traction zoning under lateral column and 
midfoot 
- Add traction patterns specific to lateral 
movement 
- Traction zoning under foot 
- Different herringbone patterns 
Benchmark Opportunity: Make Position Specific - Have general traction zoning 
- Pivot points under forefoot 
- Utilize aggressive herringbone traction 
- Large pivot point under forefoot 
 
* green cells refer to forward-specific shoe 
** blue cells refer to center-specific shoe 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 61 
 
   
 
AESTHETIC IDEATION PLAN 
 
 
 
Demby 62 
 
   
 
 
 
 
MATERIAL RESOURCING PLAN 
 
GUARD SHOE 
PART PERFORMANCE MATERIAL THAT WILL IDEAS OF WHERE TO SOURCE THE GOALS SOLVE THIS MATERIAL 
-Look in bins 
Nylon Mesh -Look under tables in studios 
-Buy online (Amazon) 
-Buy at Mill End 
Upper Breathability -Call local material vendors 
-Contact suppliers through NW show 
-Mock up via laser cutting 
 -Take mesh from existing shoes/products 
 
TPU Film -Look in bins 
-Look under tables in studios 
-Buy online (Amazon) 
Toe Cap Strength and stability -Buy at Mill End 
-Call local material vendors 
-Contact suppliers through NW show 
  
Demby 63 
 
   
 
Heel Counter Foot Lockdown TPU Film Same as above 
KFF PU Foam and polyester 
jersey -Look in bins for foam, die or laser cut 
-Buy online (Amazon) 
-Call local material vendors 
Heel Collar Comfort -Contact suppliers through NW show 
-Source from existing pair of shoes 
-Source from existing sports product 
(padding) 
 
-Look in bins 
Polyester Latex Elastic Band -Look under tables in studios 
-Look in hallway near 3D room 
-Look in Nucleus 
Upper – Arch Arch Activation - -Buy at Mill End 
Activation System stretch -Buy online (Amazon) -Take off of existing product  
-Ace wrap bandages?  
-Sew multiple elastic pieces together 
 -Mock it using spandex material 
 
Molded TPU -Mock it with 3D printing 
-Cast it with 3D part 
Shank Flexible Support -Contact composite scrapper 
-Buy existing shank plate online (Amazon) 
  
-Look in Bins 
EVA Foam -Look under tables in studios 
-Buy online (Amazon) 
-Buy at Mill End 
-Call local material vendors 
Sock liner Comfort -Laser cut and vacuum form 
-Use existing sockliners 
-Create my own foam layering multiple 
foam pieces 
  
 
Foam Composites -Create my own foam layering systems 
Gel -Source from existing products (Nike 
Nike Air unit zoom air unit in Kobe shoe insoles) 
Sockliner Cushioning -Create my own “gel units” 
Elements Cushioning -Source Gel units from existing shoes -Laser cut pockets within sockliner foam    
for cushioning elements 
-Buy cushioning element online 
  
Midsole Cushioning Compression Molded EVA -Laser cut foam found in bins or elsewhere Foam in studio 
Demby 64 
 
   
 
FORWARD SHOE 
PART PERFORMANCE MATERIAL THAT WILL IDEAS OF WHERE TO SOURCE THE GOALS SOLVE THIS MATERIAL 
Upper Breathability Nylon Mesh Same as guard shoe 
Toe Cap Strength and stability TPU Film Same as guard shoe 
Heel Counter Foot Lockdown TPU Film Same as guard shoe 
Heel Collar Comfort KFF PU Foam and polyester jersey Same as guard shoe 
Shank Flexible Support Molded TPU Same as guard shoe 
Sock liner Comfort EVA Foam Same as guard shoe 
Midsole Cushioning Compression molded EVA Foam Same as guard shoe 
-Create my own foam layering systems 
Foam Composites -Source from existing products (Nike 
Gel zoom air unit in Kobe shoe insoles) 
Nike Air Unit 
Midsole Cushioning -Create my own “gel units” 
Elements Cushioning -Source Gel units from existing shoes -Laser cut pockets within sockliner foam 
for cushioning elements 
 -Buy cushioning element online 
 
Outsole Traction Molded Rubber  Same as guard shoe 
-Die cut foam  
-Could mock it with 3D printing 
-Could mock it by casting from a 3D part 
-Could mock it by making my own foam 
cast 
-Could source from existing shoe 
 -Could buy online (Amazon) 
 
Molded Rubber -Could source from existing pair of shoes 
-Could buy online (Amazon, AliExpress) 
Outsole Traction -Could mock it with 3D printing 
-Could mock it by laser cutting traction 
pattern into foam 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 65 
 
   
 
 
CENTER SHOE 
PART PERFORMANCE MATERIAL THAT WILL IDEAS OF WHERE TO SOURCE THE GOALS SOLVE THIS MATERIAL 
Upper Breathability Nylon Mesh Same as guard shoe 
Toe Cap Strength and stability TPU Film Same as guard shoe 
Heel Counter Foot Lockdown TPU Film Same as guard shoe 
Heel Collar Comfort KFF PU Foam and polyester jersey Same as guard shoe 
Carbon Fiber 
-Contact composite scrapper 
Shank Stability -Could mock it with 3D printing -Could cast it from 3D part 
-Could lay-up carbon part 
 
Sock liner Comfort EVA Foam Same as guard shoe 
Midsole Cushioning Compression molded EVA Foam Same as guard shoe 
-Create my own foam layering systems 
-Source from existing products (Nike 
zoom air unit in Kobe shoe insoles) 
Midsole Cushioning Foam Composites -Create my own “gel units” 
Elements Cushioning Gel -Source Gel units from existing shoes Nike Air Unit -Laser cut pockets within sockliner foam 
for cushioning elements 
-Buy cushioning element online 
 
Outsole Traction Molded Rubber  Same as guard shoe 
 
 
  
Demby 66 
 
   
 
IDEATION PLAN TIMELINE 
 
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 
2/7 2/8 2/9 2/10 2/11 2/12 2/13 
-Material selection 
 MIDTERM MIDTERM MIDTERM MIDTERM (11-
~1 hour 
PREVIEW PREP PREP 11:15) BREAK -Upper sketching (30 ideas) 
~3 hours 
2/14 2/15 2/16 2/17 2/18 2/19 2/20 
-Upper making 
(15 ideas) -Class (2-5) 
~3 hours -Midsole -Outsole 
-Midsole sketching (25 sketching (50 -CLASS (2-5) -Ind. Study (1-2) -3D -Material selection  
sketching (25 ideas) ideas) -3D drafting -3D drafting (best drafting ~1 hour 
ideas) -Insole -Draw ideas on (best ideas) ideas) (best ideas) -Upper sketching (30 
-Insole sketching (25 last (5 ideas) ~4 hours ~4 hours ~4 hours ideas) 
sketching (25 ideas) ~3 hours ~3 hours 
ideas) ~2 hours 
~2 hours 
2/21 2/22 2/23 2/24 2/25 2/26 2/27 
-Upper making 
(15 ideas) -Class (2-5) 
~3 hours -Midsole -Outsole 
-Midsole sketching (25 sketching (50 -CLASS (2-5) -Ind. Study (1-2) -3D -Material selection  
sketching (25 ideas) ideas) -3D drafting -3D drafting (best drafting ~1 hour 
ideas) -Insole -Draw ideas on (best ideas) ideas) (best ideas) -Upper sketching (30 
-Insole sketching (25 last (5 ideas) ~4 hours ~4 hours ~4 hours ideas) 
sketching (25 ideas) ~3 hours ~3 hours 
ideas) ~2 hours 
~2 hours 
2/28 3/1 3/2 3/3 3/4 3/5 3/6 
-Upper making 
(15 ideas) -Class (2-5) 
~3 hours -Midsole -Outsole 
-Midsole sketching (25 sketching (50 -CLASS (2-5) -Ind. Study (1-2) -3D 
sketching (25 ideas) ideas) -3D drafting -3D drafting (best drafting FINAL REVIEW 
ideas) -Insole -Draw ideas on (best ideas) ideas) (best ideas) PREP 
-Insole sketching (25 last (5 ideas) ~4 hours ~4 hours ~4 hours 
sketching (25 ideas) ~3 hours 
ideas) ~2 hours 
~2 hours 
3/7 3/8 3/9 3/10    
FINAL 
REVIEW FINAL FINAL 
PREP REVIEW   REVIEW    
 
 
 
Demby 67 
 
   
 
IDEATION 
 
LAST SPECIFICATIONS 
 
1. Female Last 
2. Women’s size 8 
3. Offset: 6 mm 
4. Forefoot net: 94 mm  Rearfoot net: 75 mm 
5. Last performance attributes: Female specific fit, higher arch 
 
 
 
SKETCHING IDEATION 
 
Upper 
The research findings from both the pressure insoles and 2D motion capture indicated that 
adequate arch support in a shoe had a positive effect on knee alignment and plantar loading. 
Consumer research also suggested a need for arch support within basketball shoes. As a result, 
the main goals for the upper were: 1. how to implement arch taping into a shoe and 2., how to 
make that arch support adjustable for the user. Sketching was therefore used to ideate several 
arch activation systems.  
.r..,  
( 
..r.,  1 
Demby 68 
 
   
 
Midsole 
The research findings also indicated a strong correlation between the cushioning systems within 
the women’s running and HOVR basketball shoe and correct knee alignment and plantar loading. 
Pressure insole and consumer feedback data were used to map out the cushioning zones of each 
shoe. The guard shoe features a drop-in midsole to create an agility-focused, close-to-ground feel 
whereas the forward and center shoes feature a classic midsole with imbedded cushioning units 
BACKGROUND: 
Female players are - 27% - Midsole cushioning needs - Female running shoe was softest+ 
lighter than male players to be 27% more flex ible encouraged best landing technique 
GOAL: IMPLEM ENTATION : 
Comine soft running cush ion wi t h Util ize insole pressure maps to create a mix 
basket ball st abili t y + responsiveness of f i rm and soft cushioning 
JUMP 
Do your feet ever hun at the end of practice / 
games? If so. whe re? 
Consumer Data Pressure Insole Data Data Driven Insole 
Cushioning System 
 
GUARD SHOE FORWARD SHOE CENTER SHOE 
Drop in midsole Add midsole (thin) ~--- Add more midsole 
6 .,,,,, 
r 
Demby 69 
 
   
 
Outsole 
 
Findings from the pressure insoles were again used to drive the zoning out the outsole traction 
pattern.  
 
 
PROTOTYPING 
HOW CAN I CREATE ADJU STA BLE A RCH ACTIVATI O N? 
C 
. --1 
--~ ·• W-- - I 
~ ~... .. 
~ 
 
Demby 70 
 
   
 
 
 
 
  
Demby 71 
 
   
 
TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION 
 
Arch Activation System 
The arch activation system features a continuous elastic band that wraps around the food to 
support the arch during movement. The band is stretchy and can be pulled to tighten. There is a 
molded TPU plate that sits between the insole and midsole that acts as a channel for the band to 
run through, allowing the band to be continuous. Within the plate are flex grooves that provide 
the plate the ability to bend as the band is pulled, which creates the activation of the arch. Inside 
the plate are small teeth which mimic the function of a zip-tie system by allowing the band to 
flow through but resisting its rebound back. These teeth allow the system to be tightened in 
specific areas.  
 
 
Demby 72 
 
   
 
 
 
 
Demby 73 
 
   
 
 
 
 
Demby 74 
 
   
 
 
 
FINAL CONCEPTS  
 
 
Demby 75 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
Demby 76 
 
   
 
TESTING VALIDATION 
In addition to weighing each shoe, the same testing protocol performed to the benchmark 
products will be performed on this footwear collection. These include the 2D Motion Capture 
test to analyze knee alignment during wear as well as the Pressure Insole test to analyze plantar 
loading. It is anticipated that the designed shoes will result in straighter knee valgus angles of 2 
degrees and promote safer landing technique by reducing the occurrence of flat-footed landing. 
The shoes will also promote better perceived arch support to the user via higher levels of 
proprioception. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
Demby 77 
 
   
 
PHASE III: PROTOTYPE & VALIDATION 
SPRING 2021 
  
Demby 78 
 
   
 
 
 
Women have been underrepresented in basketball since the sport’s inception. Although interest 
in women’s basketball has been on the rise over the last decade and females make up over 30% 
of the sport, less than 1% of basketball shoes are marketed towards women and currently there is 
only 1 shoe on the market right now that is female specific, which is the Under Armour HOVR 
Breaktrhu. 
0 
• 
VVN[Jfl. a-id NCM\i', llasketba I 
r ,nc1 '> l/1e,·.cr<;h Ic c.,- YccH 1 
NCAAW 
31% < 1°/o 1 
Of basketball players Of basketball shoes are Number of female-specific 
WNBA 
are female' marketed towards women 3 basketball shoes on the market 
02 
 
Demby 79 
 
   
 
 
When companies do release female basketball shoes, they generally do what is called “shrink it + 
pink it”, which is taking an existing model, changing the colorway, and scaling it down. So the 
men’s last and design stay the same. This is unacceptable, because women’s feet are 
proportioned much differently than men’s feet and are not just scaled down versions. In fact, 
female feet have a wider forefoot, higher arch, and narrower heel, creating more of a triangular 
shaped foot as opposed to the rectangular male foot.  
 
 
 
 
On top of that, female basketball players are also 8 TIMES more likely to tear their ACL while 
playing basketball compared to male players. Interestingly, 70% of these injuries are from non-
contact situations.  
This fall I did a deep dive into academic and biomechanical research trying to make sense of this 
huge discrepancy in knee injuries. Although every ACL injury is unique and multifactorial, I was 
able to pinpoint two major injury mechanisms that could be influenced through footwear, and 
those were knee alignment, and loading patterns.  
Knee alignment is influenced by knee valgus angle, which is when your knees cave in during 
movement. Females are a lot more likely to have high knee valgus angles during movement, 
which places their ACL at extreme risk because the misalignment of their leg reduces the ability 
of surrounding muscles to stabilize the knee, placing greater amounts of stress on the knee 
ligaments. Moving forward in my experimental research I knew I wanted to monitor this via 2D 
motion capture of the frontal plane.  
Demby 80 
 
   
 
Loading patterns are the way we place our weight on our feet which is affected by our landing 
technique from movements like jumping. This is key because a lot of knee injuries occur when 
landing from a jump. During my research, I found a few studies that suggested that female 
athletes are more likely to land jumps flat footed. This again puts their ACLs at higher risk 
because landing flat footed from a jump creates a higher impulse value because the body has less 
time to adapt to the change in momentum which again, sends extra load onto the ACL. So for my 
testing, I used pressure insoles to monitor my test subject’s loading patterns.  
 
 
 
 
For my testing, I wanted to investigate if female specific fit and arch support in footwear 
influenced knee valgus angle and landing patterns in female athletes. To test for this, I had test 
subjects do a drop jump test in 3 different shoes to mimic 3 different conditions: 
-  the first one being a men’s basketball shoe that was obviously male specific and had 
little to no arch support.  
- The second one was my baseline product which was that Under Armour HOVR shoe 
I mentioned earlier, this one is female specific, basketball specific, and has a really 
aggressive arch support.  
- The condition was a women’s running shoe that is female specific and had a moderate 
arch support.  
From the videos you can see that the test subject has really poor knee alignment in both the 
men’s and Under Armor basketball shoes and then it actually straightens out a bit in the running 
shoes. And then looking at the pressure maps below those, it’s harder to see but you can also tell 
that she begins distributing her weight a bit more along the foot going from the men’s shoes to 
Demby 81 
 
   
 
the running shoes. What these two tests showed me was that female-specific fit and arch support 
positively affected both knee alignment and loading patterns and could potentially reduce risk for 
ACL injury.  
 
 
 
Moving forward from my testing, I knew I wanted to focus on arch support, however I didn’t 
want to go the traditional route of a supportive arch insole, especially because the ones in the 
Under Armour shoe were so aggressive, they were uncomfortable. Instead, I was inspired by 
arch taping techniques and the concept of arch activation, which entails lifting the arch from 
above in a dynamic way rather than holding it up from a rigid support below. In the video you 
can see some of the prototypes I made exploring which construction would be the most 
successful for the athlete. These varied from single wide elastic bands to multiple band zones 
connected to the eyelets. Ultimately, I landed upon the single strap concept because I wanted to 
keep the arch mechanism independent from the lace tightening system.  
 
Demby 82 
 
   
 
 
 
After deciding on the technology construction, I implemented it into a pair of basketball shoes 
for user testing and validation. As you can see in the videos, I repeated the same 2D motion 
capture of the drop jump to analyze differences between my prototype and the existing shoes. In 
a perfect world, I’d have much more robust testing and would have replicated the exact same 
testing I had done previously with the exact same athletes and footwear samples, however I had 
done that baseline testing back home in Colorado and was not able to return for this second 
round. That being said, these videos are pretty inconclusive however the athlete feedback was 
very positive and in favor of the arch activation technology over the molded insoles. The athlete 
felt like it provided a lot more control and proprioception than the existing shoes. 
 
 
Demby 83 
 
   
 
 
 
My product line of shoes contains a low top guard specific shoe and a high top post-player 
specific shoe. There is about a 45 pound and 6 in different between these two positions and each 
requires a specific skillset: 
Guards play has an emphasis on agility and speed so a low top delivers that lightweight 
flexibility. Posts on the other hand, are incredibly powerful and explosive and do a large amount 
of jumping therefore a high top provides cushion and support for their style of play. 
 
Demby 84 
 
   
 
 
 
This slide shows some of the aesthetic sketching I did for the guard shoe, just figuring out how to 
weave in the functional aspects with a fast and agile-looking shoe. 
 
 
Demby 85 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
Below are the ideation sketches for the high top post shoe, these had a heavier focus on stability 
and cushion. And these are my linework samples for the post shoe, which focus more on pivot 
points in the forefoot and heel. 
 
Demby 86 
 
   
 
 
 
The construction of the upper for this shoe was similar with the same material layering however 
the strap concept was a bit different, because this shoe has a midsole I wanted to get a little more 
creative with the strap and had it wrap all the way around the foot. For this shoe there is a foam 
midsole, a flexible 3D-printed plate that acts as a channel for the strap, and then the rubber 
outsole.  
 
Demby 87 
 
rrr 
r r, :!: 
rtt n 
frtt ~ 
rrr o 
r rr --a f ff C 
,, ~ 
-I 
r to 
ff z ' I 
I'  
   
 
This video explains the layering system a bit better as I take apart the 3D printed pieces I used to 
mold my final midsole and outsole which sandwiched the arch plate and the next video shows 
the midsole system integrated with the upper, showing how the strap weaves through the entire 
thing and connects back at the top.  
 
 
 
 
Demby 88 
 
   
 
Although the glaring outcome of this project was to reduce risk of ACL injury but it goes further 
than that. With increased athlete confidence, level of play would be pushed, and athletes would 
be more likely to take risks on the court, having peace of mind that they’re less likely to sustain a 
season-ending injury. This would also extend player longevity. Having shoes like this on the 
market is an investment in women’s sports and would empower female athletes and help grow 
women’s basketball as a whole.  
 
 
 
 
Demby 89 
 
   
 
 
 
 
Demby 90 
 
   
 
PACKAGING 
/ ~Hu'FT/ 
Polyester drawstring bag for lowtop and hig htop 
 
 
LOWTOP TECH DWG 
Lateral Top Medial Outsole 
10.1D an 
§ 
0 
::: 
0.025an 
0.036an 
7.50an 
 
Demby 91 
 
   
 
HIGHTOP TECH DWG 
Lateral Outsole Medial Top 
1.69cm 
o.oean 
 
Demby 92