The Green Bay Packers were a really awful football team from 1973 to 1991. During that span, the Packers never won a playoff game, qualified for the playoffs just once (the strike-shortened 1982 season) and managed just three winning seasons (two if you don’t count 8-7-1 in 1978 as a “winning” season).

Yet during this span, Packer fans remained astonishingly loyal. Lambeau Field was sold out for every game, and the waiting list for season tickets grew beyond the normal life expectancy of anyone who applied. Those of us who suspend life for 3 1/2 hours once a week each fall aren’t Brett Favre fans or Donald Driver fans or Aaron Kampman fans or Greg Jennings; we’re Green Bay Packers fans. Management know this. Does Brett Favre?

Who knows whether Favre is playing a public relations game with the Green Bay Packers or just simply can’t come to terms with a decision he made. By now, Packer fans are familiar with Favre’s desire to unretire after giving an emotional retirement press conference in March. The retirement decision is one he obviously regrets, but if he believes he can win a pre-season public-relations game with Packers management, he’s wrong. The Packers have the luxury of putting the interests of the franchise first, regardless of public opinion.

This much is clear to the Packers management team of coach Mike McCarthy and General Manager Ted Thompson: As of July 12, 2008, the Green Bay Packers are better off without Favre as their quarterback. Perhaps that wasn’t true in March, but it’s true now. The Packers have made a significant investment in two highly-touted quarterbacks -- projected starter Aaron Rodgers and last spring’s second-round draft steal Brian Brohm -- and they don’t need a soon-to-be 39-year-old quarterback retarding either one’s development.

For the long term, it’s better for Favre to step aside, and it isn’t even clear whether Favre is the best option for 2008. Remember last November’s game at Dallas, when Favre left with an injury during the first half? With Favre (5-for-14, 56 yards, two interceptions, zero touchdowns), the Packers looked like a sure loser. With Rodgers (18-for-26, 201 yards, zero interceptions, one touchdown), the Packers looked like a team with a chance to win. Dallas eventually won, 37-27, but Rodgers played better than Favre.

Even if the Packers suffered a setback in the realm of public opinion, how would that impact the franchise? Would season ticket holders fail to renew? Would fans at Lambeau buy fewer hot dogs and less beer? Would the waiting list for season tickets shrink? Would sales of Packer merchandise tank? Probably not. This isn’t the NBA, where LeBron James leaving the Cleveland Cavaliers would cause half their fans to disappear. The NFL is about teams, not stars, and Packers management has the luxury of making its own best roster judgments.

More important, management knows that the public-relations game will ultimately be decided on the field. If the Packers go 8-8 and Favre leads another team deep into the playoffs, it’s a public-relations failure. If the Packers mount a deep playoff run and Favre’s new team doesn’t reach the playoffs, it’s a public-relations success. If the Packers and Favre’s new team meet each other in the 2009 Super Bowl, it would fulfill the NFL’s wildest fantasy.

The NFL is a very bottom-line business. Winning is good public relations, losing is bad public relations, and everything else doesn’t matter very much. Check back in January to see who wins the public-relations contest.

Steve Rundio the sports editor of Tomah Newspapers.