It seems that a number of Mets fans aren't particularly thrilled with Citi Field's emphasis on honoring the memory of Jackie Robinson while seemingly ignoring the Mets' rich history.

I'm in New York this week, on "vacation," helping out with the care of my 88-year-old dad, perhaps the oldest living Giants fan who traces his fan roots to the Giants of New York -- John McGraw and Carl Hubbell and Mel Ott and Bill Terry. And the word on the streets -- or at least the word on the patio during a Father's Day get-together of family, friends and neighbors -- was that the Mets' new home, Citi Field, has overdone the Jackie Robinson memorials while ignoring the Mets' own tradition.

I think I can state with the utmost certainty that racism is not an issue in this discussion. The argument is basic: Robinson, a historic figure as the first African-American major leaguer in the 20th century, was a Brooklyn Dodger. And the Dodgers left Brooklyn more than 50 years ago. He was never a Met, never had any association with the Mets, who became New York's sole National League team in 1962.

So, the argument goes, why does Citi Field have numerous, very visible memorials to Robinson, but fans are hard-pressed to find anything memorializing, say, the 1969 and 1986 World Series championship teams? Why no memorials to Mets greats of the past, such as Tom Seaver?

Interesting questions.