NIKE Is Quietly Killing the Athleisure Game
First Look

NIKE Is Quietly Killing the Athleisure Game

Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.

NIKE Is Quietly Killing the Athleisure Game

I’ve been stuck in my ways for quite some time.

When I find something I like, I stick with it. Seems reasonable, right?

That’s how I’ve felt for years with lululemon golf apparel. It’s been my go-to brand, more specifically for shorts and pants. I hadn’t found anything to rival the quality, fit and comfort of the lululemon ABC and Commission pants…

Until I tried NIKE’s new, very under-the-radar drop, the 24.7 collection.

It’s NIKE’s first real foray into the space dominated by the likes of the aforementioned lululemon, Vuori and Alo. The crossover between lifestyle and sport. Or, in more trendy verbiage, athleisure.

I know most of you don’t care, but I see this as a big step from the world’s no. 1 sportswear brand. While NIKE has historically dominated the sportswear category, it’s yet to find its footing in the gray area of athleisure wear.

After spending ample time in the 24.7 collection, I can’t understand why they waited so long.

NIKE 24.7 PerfectStretch Bottoms: The Perfect Bottom?

I wouldn’t quite call this pair the perfect bottom, but they’re pretty darn good. Ample stretch, a loop to hang your keys, and a few nice zipper pockets complete the utilitarian package.

They look polished, too. Nice enough to wear to the course, but casual enough that I can rock them around the house.

That can be said for the shorts. While I could probably use a little longer inseam (nobody wants to see these thunder thighs), the pockets are perfectly placed, the material is uber-stretchy, and they look nice, despite the sweatpant-like comfort.

The $125 Elephant

And, the big reveal that you’ve all been waiting for. The price? The pants start at $125. A far cry from what the weekend warrior is willing to pay, but more than reasonable for what I tend to spend on golf apparel. In the same vein, the lululemon pants that I’ll be replacing with these retail for $138 … so who’s the real winner here?

In all seriousness, golf apparel doesn’t have to be THIS expensive. And I’m not going to sit here and confidently say that you won’t get better value out of something from 32 Degrees, UNRL or even the clearance section at lululemon.

But what I can say is that for a brand snob such as I, these NIKE pants are better than any other I’ve tried from the brand, and are among the best pants in my overflowing closet of golf apparel, rivaling the likes of the best in the business.

For You

For You

News
Jun 19, 2026
USGA Spot On With Shinnecock Setup During Blustery Opening Day
News
Jun 19, 2026
PAYNTR’s Rise Is No Accident: Five MyGolfSpy Members Tested The Reserve Classic Tour RS
News
Jun 19, 2026
Scratch By 50: I Switched From The Worst-Rated Driver To The Best-Rated Driver
Connor Lindeman

Connor Lindeman

Connor Lindeman

Connor is MyGolfSpy's resident sneakerhead and the authority on all things golf shoe performance. He's tested over 150 different pairs (and counting). When he isn't scrolling Twitter to find his next golf shoe purchase, you can find him at the piano or trying a new dessert place with his wife and daughter. #Lefty

Connor Lindeman

Connor Lindeman

Connor Lindeman

Connor Lindeman

Connor Lindeman





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      Jim

      12 months ago

      Bad Birdie’s golf short for $78 is better than Nike and Lulu. It’s also better than Vuori, Peter Millar, Eddie Bauer and Prana. I have them all and Bad Birdie wins.

      Reply

      HikingMike

      12 months ago

      Interesting. Nike has long had a problem on their hands with Athleta and all of these athleisure styles. Interesting they are jumping in quietly. Maybe they are going to see how first versions do and then go bigger after that.

      Reply

      Will

      12 months ago

      They sure do charge a lot compared to what they pay the kids in the Chinese sweatshops to make it.

      Reply

      Steve

      12 months ago

      You may need to check that comment, I worked in New Zealand back in the late nineties for Nike and they changed that back then.

      Reply

      Clay Nicolsen

      12 months ago

      The bulging, stretched-out pocket opening in the third photo is absolutely hideous. It screams: “Buy clothing that actually fits.”

      Put a spare ball in there and it’ll be even worse.

      Hard pass.

      Reply

      Josh

      12 months ago

      I expect if Connor went up a size the pocket would sit nicer, but then they’d ride much looser at the waist.

      O/c, the largest size Nike is choosing to sell is 42/32. That’s borderline skinny jeans territory – ‘killing the athleisure game’ while ignoring anyone over 6 feet tall or more than 250lbs doesn’t seem synonymous.

      Reply

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    News
    Jun 19, 2026
    USGA Spot On With Shinnecock Setup During Blustery Opening Day
    News
    Jun 19, 2026
    PAYNTR’s Rise Is No Accident: Five MyGolfSpy Members Tested The Reserve Classic Tour RS
    News
    Jun 19, 2026
    Scratch By 50: I Switched From The Worst-Rated Driver To The Best-Rated Driver