I always thought black Leed style shoe and jeans were a classic combo and being that denim is so popular again figure all different styles of shoes in black would be more popular not less.
I always just assumed that black shoes went well with all sorts of khaki style pants regardless of top..wouldn't the style of shoe dictate it? In my brain I would think nearly every color shirt would go with black pants and black shoes.. Will look at the Players for also for the suede, the Mora 2 is just enough of a pain in the ass for me to get on that I think I am good with one pair of them
I could see how you might conclude this. Black is pretty neutral, right? But you also have to think about coherence in addition to color. You pretty much want all of your outfit's pieces to tell the same story in terms of formality AND city/county spectrum. So you've chosen black shoes and black pants, let's put the rest of the outfit together. What color shirt are you going to wear? White is the obvious choice. Light blue wouldn't be as good as white, but I suppose it could work. Any of your standard pastels (pink, yellow) would be telling a "carefree" spring/summer story while your black pants and shoes communicate formality or darker colored fall/winter vibe. So while the colors may technically work, the message communicated does not comport and creates incoherence.
Note also that I say all of this from a Classic Menswear perspective. on the Street Wear and Denim side of things, black is a far more popular color choice, but again the best outfits including it tend to be monochrome black/white/gray ones. Sure, black goes with denim, but so does pretty much EVERYTHING else. Brown also looks way better on NAVY IMO.
What is your take on the black McTavish?
How about a black blucher like Leeds or Macneil?
How does a navy shoe fit into this thought process of colors? You have not mentioned it in relationship to any of the versatile or non versatile colors. I am curious to the opinion?
I have had trouble with the Navy shoe.
I sold my first pair of navy chukkas due to them feeling less than versatile.
I have a navy shell boot again that I like much more, as it is more casual.
The black McTavish is interesting because he's both pretty "country" and well, black. I almost always associate country with brownish earth tones. I mean with his casual yet balmoral styling and contrast stitching and heavy appearance mean he's just all across the board in terms of classic shoe standing. From a CM perspective he shouldn't exist and is a terrible abomination. However, I think he could be worn well with jeans, although I think I'd prefer if he were a boot instead. I don't know if he'd work where a brown shoe normally would, he might given the stitching and styling, etc. I'd probably try him on and see. A caveat I expressed before is needed. The fact that this shoe is such an inherent abomination demands that the rest of your outfit be absolutely on point if you are going to look sharp.
Leeds or macneil are sort of the same story for me. The plain fact is that black is a formal color while all of these styles are informal. This is an inherent contradiction within the shoe itself which could be fun to play with and make look good; but they are the furthest thing from versatile. They are advanced or expert level shoes IMO and should never be the foundation of a solid shoe wardrobe. Again if you are going to wear shoes that break the rules that badly you have got to know what you are doing and make sure everything else is perfect.