Seriously, are they gonna do this every year? This is cheap promotion. I understand recognizing this achievement every 5 years for anniversaries, but the 62nd? Come on... they're just trying to ride the Obama wave at this point. They're cheapening it by beating it to death.

I have a more practical problem -- I don't get cable; the "everyone wears 42" game is usually one of the first weekend games of the year that is carried on over-the-air TV. If that's the first game I watch, I spend half the time trying to figure out who's who.

The numbers are there for a reason, which is defeated by having everyone wear the same number.

Seriously? these two narrow minded fools obviously do not recognize the magnitude of what is and should be celebrated on an annual basis. Not only was Jackie Robinson the breaker of the color barrier, but is also regarded as one of the best ball players EVER. To be ignorant enough to compare this tribute to the election of President Obama only supports the lack of thinking in this society. And Mr. McG, if you don't know who players are without having to see their number and name on the back of their jersey, I suggest you go back to playing Halo.

I don't know how having every player wear No. 42 is "inadequate as a tribute." Certainly fans buy replica jerseys with the numbers of players they admire.

What I really don't get is the writer's claim that many modern players, wearing Robinson's number, "are going to get into fights, bark at umpires...and otherwise do things Jackie probably wouldn't do." Is the writer aware, at all, of Robinson's legacy. Yes, during his first two seasons, Robinson looked the other way when he was showered with an almost unbearable level of abuse. But, after two seasons, when he felt there were enough blacks in the Major Leagues to prevent integration from being reversed, Robinson fought back. He became a very competive and very aggressive player (a reputation he already had from the Negro Leagues).

Towards the end of 1948, his second season, Robinson was ejected from a game for riding umpire Walter "Butch" Henline, who also happened to be a racist. A few years later, after a being involved in a very physical rundown between third and home in which Phillies pitcher Russ Meyers grabbed Robinson's legs to slow him down, Robinson challenged the righthander to a fight under the stands when the game was over. In 1955, Robinson charged so hard into Giant Davey Williams, who was covering first after a bunt, that Williams had to be removed from the field in a stretcher.

Once he was assured that integration was permanent, Robinson gave the game all he had. Players who do the same, including those who get into fights and bark at umpires, would do Robinson proud.

It is just stupid. It was stupid when Selig ordered every team to retire the number and it is doubly stupid to make every player where the same number. Baseball can acknowledge his contributions to the game without resorting to such stupidity.

This is just stupid. It was stupid when Selig ordered every team to retire thenumber and it is doubly stupid tomake every player where the same number. Baseball should be able to acknowledge Robinson's contributions to the game without resorting to stupid stunts. He never played for the Indians - why is his number retired for that team. Or a better example the Giants. He hated the Giants (the Dodgers biggest rival) so much he retired rather than accept a trade to that team.

You guys, with the exception of Citizen of the Nation, fail to comprehend the historical significance of Jackie Robinson. Robinson didn't just change baseball, he changed America. No other athlete or sporting event can make that claim.

Despite the attention that sports receive in on our society, sports are generally nothing more than a diversion. Generally, sporting events have little day-to-day significance. That is not true, however, of this one event. Robinson's appearance in a major league uniform is the only time when sports really and truly made history. The Brooklyn Dodgers (and consequently Major League Baseball) were integrated in 1947; that's a year before President Truman signed Executive Order 9981, which desegregated the military, and seven years before the Brown v. Board of Education decision started to end of segration in public schools. Jackie Robinson made those events possible.

Teammates and fans may have initially looked at Robinson as a black man, but, as people became familiar with this skills, his talent transcended his race. He became someone on "their side" who could help win ballgames. If not for Robinson, the civil rights struggles of the 1950s and 1960s, as difficult as they were, would have been even more formidable. America would not be where it is today without him.

Of course baseball is going to celebrate Robinson. A lot has been accomplished on the diamond, but the signing of Jackie Robinson is the only incident where baseball (and sports in general) made history outside the playing field.

I agree that having every single player is not a fitting tribute to Robinson, for the simple reason that I think what he accomplished, both on the field and off, is too large for us to be able to completely and properly pay tribute to him. And I do agree that perhaps doing it every year is a bit too much for the simple reason that the fans will, over time, become a bit hardened to it. Look at President's day - do that many people really take time to reflect on the accomplishments of George Washington? Or is it simply just another day that the banks are closed, and the kids get off of school? Ar ethere that many people who truly observe Memorial Day, or do most Americans simply look at it as just another 3 day weekend, meant for barbecuing or going to the beach? Do we really all ponder the men and women who have given their lives for our country? And the same is probably beginning to happening to Martin Luther King Day as well. Again, most Americans probably simply look at it as just another day off, and spend very little time even considering the life of Dr. King.

And I do agree with the point that was made about a player of today arguing with an umpire or starting a fight with another player. There is a tremendous difference between a player whining over being called out on a pitch that was an inch off the plate, or a player charging the mound because a pitch was 2 inches inside and a player like Robinson fighting in order to be treated as an equal on the playing field. It's like the difference between someone coming to the defense of a defenseless person who is being robbed or beaten and a person walking into a bar and fighting someone who they think looked at them funny.

I appreciate Robinson's accomplishments a great deal. As an amateur baseball historian, I have read dozens of books and probably hundreds of articles about Jackie and his struggles. And my admiration for him grows with every little thing I learn about him. And I also have spent a lot of time learning about the Negro Leagues, and the incredible ballplayers that played in them at a time when they were their major leagues. But again, I don't feel that any tribute can truly be "enough". And I worry that eventually, the effect of this tribute will wear off. And when it does, will baseball continue it in its' present form? Or will it attempt to make it even a larger tribute? Or will it simply eliminate it all together feeling that the fans are not really paying any attention to it anymore?

And if the use of numbers is as useless as some say in defending every single player wearing that #42, perhaps we should just eliminate the numbers all together. Or perhaps instead, the players could wear their own number on their sleeves - then you are both recognizing Robinson and still allowing the players to be identified. (This also could open up the idea of those jerseys being auctioned for charity purposes - what Cardinal's fan wouldn't love to have a cards jersey with Robinson's number 42 on it, along with Pujols' #5 as proof that it was his jersey? And that would make each player's jersey unigue as well, and would probably drive the value up. And maybe the money could go to a program like RBI - to help ensure that young kids get a chance to play the game) The other possibility would be to have only one player from each team where that number that day. And perhaps it could be chosen either by the team members, or the manager, by a fan vote, or maybe even the commissioner's office, to honor the player who best reflects Robinson's spirit both on and off the field. Then perhaps the wearing of that number would be a little more special, and perhaps even a better tribute to the man Robinson was.

This is not a "tribute", this is MLB's way of making more money. Now the MLB can sell #42 jerseys of every player in the MLB. The kid who has the Pujols #5 jersey now has got to have the Pujols #42 jersey!

Having every player where #42 degrades what Jackie Robinson stood for. Mr. Robinson struggled for the "big picture", to enable all persons, regardless of race, religion, etc. to have a fair opportunity in our country. Would it be appropriate for Manny Ramirez and other players interested in only themselves to wear Mr. Robinson's number? I don't think so.

Well, someone is going to make a lot of $ making all of those jersey. Hopefully they all will be signed by players and personnel then auctioned for the charity of choice of the Robinson family. Bud Selig is a natural as a dictator.

First of all, has anybody forgotten (or is anybody aware at all) that Mariano Rivera wears Jackie Robinson's old uniform number due to a *GRANDFATHER CLAUSE*?? In the second place (and not necessarily in that order), while I can understand some posters complaining about the whole team--never mind both the home and visting teams, league-wide--wearing it on the anniversary of Robinson's having broken MLB's color barrier and other posters saying that the focus should be on the player wearing #42 at that game, one thing you can't take away from all this is that it's because of the integration of Major League Baseball that there are many blacks--Hispanic as well as African-American--playing therein today. Not to mention that it was practically the catalyst (or certainly was *A* catalyst) for the modern-day Civil Rights Movement. It is difficult to imagine Michael Nutter as the mayor of Philly (and his immediate predecessor John Street and his own next-to-immediate predecessor Wilson Goode), David Dinkins having once been mayor of New York, Deval Patrick as governor of Massachusetts, Doug Wilder as governor of Virginia (and more recently mayor of its capital, Richmond), every mayor of Atlanta since 1974 having been black, an emerging black middle (and to a certain extent, upper) class, the Fair Housing Act, and Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia (yes, that Supreme Court ruling, too) as well as the aforementioned (by Marty in Boulder) Brown v. Board of Education and Executive Order 9981 without Jackie Robinson signing on with the Brooklyn Dodgers.

This is a nice tribute, but when is MLB going to do the same for the #21 of the Great Roberto Clemente?

In this economic climate, it seems like a large expense to MLB and the respective teams to provide these jerseys for one game. Maybe they could have put aside the idea for this year and publicized how many jobs they were able to save as a result of it. That would be PC in todays environment.

It's a very sad commentary to see the venom, the hate and shallowness of our fellow citizens. What in the world has become of, the once greatest nation on earth, that once upon a time asked "give us your tired, your poor?"

I don't want to be shocked. Perhaps I am because I'm too embarrassed by these horrific, moronic remarks to be shocked.

they should just wear it on an arm band. oh that isn`t controversial

as a Modern-day baseball fan, I am aware of Jackie Robinson's accomplishments from a historical standpoint. I have seen his stats and agree that he is one of the best players ever. That isn't up for debate.

I had to Google what was going on when I started watching the Braves game in the 5th inning tonight, because they haven't said anything about it. I really only noticed that the players didn't have any names on their jerseys, and that was what got my attention.

In googling, I found this page and realized that 42 was Robinson's number. Even being a big fan, I didn't realize that was his number. I didn't have reason to, since his games aren't shown on TV nor is he interviewed by the media, for obvious reasons. In this media-driven world, they expect people to just "get it"? Ridiculous.

Anyone harping on about how we need to celebrate this every year, get over yourself. Sure, his accomplishments mean a lot, but now are you viewing him as a baseball player or as a black man? I am more than willing to celebrate his incredible baseball career, but anyone that wants to use his race as a jumping-off point for our current problems in America is racist.

This "Tribute" is a joke. There are plenty of responsible (and less expensive) ways to celebrate a man's accomplishments. Somehow I don't think Selig took this one to committee; it sounds more like an ill-planned promotional gimmick.

Jackie Robinson is a national treasure and I think it's great that we do everything we can to honor his memory and many contributions to the national game.

That being said, my real gripe is with the number 42 itself. Why can't it be a cool number like 1 or 7? What good is 42 for anything? Who the hell wants to be 42nd at something? Ever try to find something at the store for 42 cents or 42 dollars? 42 is a number we need less of these days, not more.

I think that all of the number 42 jerseys should be autographed by the players that wore them and then should auctioned off with all of the proceeds being donated in the name of Jackie Robinson.