A noble concept, loyalty, and one that in NASCAR circles gets bandied about quite a bit these days. Team owners profess loyalty to car manufacturers, even those that are in the middle of bankruptcy restructuring and forced to cut back on their financial commitments as a result. Drivers profess loyalty to team owners, even ones whose organizations aren't performing up to expectations. And fans profess loyalty to drivers, even those who struggle to win.

Eyes open

Richard Petty Motorsports will explore "all options" as to what type of car manufacturer the NASCAR organization will partner with in the future.

• Complete story, click here
• Video: Petty on manufacturers

At its core, loyalty is a wonderful thing. It helps us to overlook small faults, helps remind us what's important, helps focus us on the bigger picture. It's capable of enhancing love, patriotism, columnist readership or frequent-flier accounts. Ultimately, loyalty is an admirable trait that helps us all to become better people.

But in sports -- NASCAR racing included -- it's completely overrated.

Hey, it's great to think we live in a world where drivers, team owners, manufacturers and sponsors all hold hands and walk together in lock-step toward victory. But that's also a fantasy. No question, loyalty exists; we see it even now, as Chevrolet team owners stand behind a parent company, General Motors, that's hacking and slashing in an attempt to make itself solvent again. But in sports, loyalty is trumped by performance and cost. Everyone is on the lookout for someone who can do it a little bit better, or can help maximize value a little bit more. Loyalty makes people blind to the reality that no, this isn't one big family, but ultimately one big business.

Which brings us to the situation at Richard Petty Motorsports. Now, RPM officials have effectively squashed some speculative reports out of Sonoma last week that the team would begin fielding a Toyota for driver Kasey Kahne later this year. The organization has no plans to switch manufacturers anytime this season, as it turns out. But what if it did? Yes, Petty himself has a long personal history with an American brand like Dodge. Yes, there are some folks in the grandstand who would go apoplectic at the thought of "Petty" on the side of a vehicle whose parent company is based in Japan.

But ultimately, isn't the goal here to perform and to win? And if the Petty team doesn't think it can do that in a Dodge, whose parent company Chrysler recently emerged from bankruptcy after brokering an agreement with Italian carmaker Fiat, don't they owe it to everyone involved with their organization to find another way? And who are they obliged to be the most loyal to, anyway -- fans in the grandstand, a domestic manufacturer that isn't able to provide the financial support it was once able to, or the men and women who work there, want to keep their jobs, and ultimately field more competitive cars?

The danger with loyalty is that it's such an emotional thing, and success in sports often requires cold, rational thinking. Sometimes, the only way to get better is to break with somebody or something that's been a part of your organization for a long time, even if such a move risks raising the ire of ticket holders. That's essentially what Joe Gibbs Racing did prior to the 2008 season, when it jumped to Toyota after 16 years of affiliation with GM brands Chevrolet and Pontiac. The move was a complete no-brainer, allowing Gibbs to not only leap off a crowded GM totem pole and become a flagship team in its own right, but also to align itself with a manufacturer that wasn't headed for a financial meltdown. The results, 13 race victories and three Chase berths to date, speak for themselves.

And yet, among the hardcore faithful, Gibbs was derided. Why? Because he was perceived as being disloyal to longtime partner GM. He was even perceived as being disloyal to America, because he partnered with a manufacturer based in a foreign country. Those kinds of allegations are easy to toss from the grandstands, where there's no need to placate young drivers impatient for success or satisfy multi-million-dollar sponsors out to maximize their investments. Yet Gibbs, the old football coach, surely knows that you go with the best combination to help you win. After all, people thought he was disloyal to Jay Schroeder when he chose Doug Williams to be the starting quarterback for the Washington Redskins' 1987 playoff campaign. That shiny Super Bowl ring on Gibbs' finger proves he was right.

In sports, those kinds of tough choices have to be made, and they have to be made regardless of emotion or any sense of loyalty. Red Bull may have been one of Toyota's charter organizations, but if the race team can improve its chances of winning by jumping to another manufacturer, the team owes that to itself to do it. Juan Montoya may be loyal to Chip Ganassi, the car owner who gave him his chance in NASCAR, but the Colombian driver's impressive results of this season make you wonder what he might have been capable of with a better team. Tony Stewart was nothing but loyal to Gibbs, his mentor for a decade. But when the chance of a lifetime presented itself, Stewart took it. Ultimately, every competitor's first priority is to be loyal to themselves.

Besides, loyalty can be a trap. We've seen it in other sports, when organizations use an athlete's loyalty to lower his market value. We've seen situations even this season in baseball, where a player thought he was being loyal to his franchise, only to discover that same loyalty wasn't offered in return. In racing, there's the situation surrounding Martin Truex Jr., who rather than leave Dale Earnhardt Inc. after last season chose to re-sign for an extra year. Maybe loyalty to DEI, his home since his Busch championship days, wasn't the only reason he did it. Now he's in a contract year, his team has been merged and rebranded, his one career victory is a little further behind him, and there are fewer quality rides available elsewhere.

And yet, car owners continue to profess their undying loyalty to manufacturers, even as more and more of the support those carmakers once provided is being stripped away. Some of them are tied to specific manufacturers through business relationships like car dealerships, or long personal histories that would make an affiliation with any other brand look as strange as Dale Earnhardt in the No. 24 car. Yet given the current economic climate and the uncertain future of the domestic automobile market, will that unconditional degree of support be reciprocated? The answer today is not nearly as sure as it once was.

That's not to say loyalty does not have its place. It's laudable what Rick Hendrick has done with Tony Eury Jr., finding a place for him within the organization rather than putting him out on the street, a fate that's befallen many a former crew chief. Relationships like the one between Mark Martin and Jack Roush, separated only by what appeared at the time to be a step by the driver toward retirement, are a hallmark of the sport. But don't think teammates Jeff Gordon and Jimmie Johnson will let their loyalty to one another get in the way of a quest for a championship. Don't think a car owner will let loyalty stand in the way of demoting a tire carrier if pit stops are too slow. And don't think crewmen or mechanics, many of whom wear a different team shirt each season, will let loyalty come between them and a better-paying job.

Yes, it's a nice sentiment. It makes NASCAR seem all warm and fuzzy, obscuring the fact that this is often a cutthroat business where nothing interferes with the quest for performance. But in racing as in all sports, loyalty only goes so far.

The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer.