Vince Lombardi wasn't running the sport as a whole, he was coach of a club.
Did the teams he played in those finals win ? No. So winning's not the only thing, is it ? If there'd been no loser, Vince wouldn't have won. So he was wrong, wasn't he ?
Winning was the only thing in Green Bay and the incredible support generated by all that disgusting winning kept this small market team at the top of the tree for a long time.
His ideas and philospohies permeated to the rest of the NFL and were seized on by the Aussies, Gibson from North Sydney I think and the aping of his strategies and ideas, adapted for RL, fueled the winning mentality and dominance of Aussie RL which has led to the present inferiority of the British game. Prior to that GB were top dogs for decades.
Just so you know , Lombardi was so revered that the Super Bowl trophy is named after him, so i guess the whole league embraced winning as a sporting concept.
A RL team from a lower division who followed his mantra and success in this new reorganised RL might just condemn a Hull or bradford to the 2nd division.