I'm fine with Brooks Koepka returning to the PGA Tour. Some pros would go further; they’re downright happy about it. Their reaction has little to do with Brooks as a person. His presence here means his absence there, which raises the value of our tour and brings us closer to what most of us want: this golf schism, this separate-worlds nightmare, to end.
Along with Dustin Johnson, Brooks was among the few defectors who remained in relatively good graces with us. Sure, he’s a jock, but much of that bravado exists just for the cameras, maybe even just for himself. He treats people with respect, which is really all you can ask from a colleague. Even his feud with Bryson DeChambeau, which took some unfortunate turns, never seemed particularly malicious on Brooks’ end. During its peak, I witnessed a tour official ask Brooks about his intentions with the rivalry. Brooks’ simple response said it all: “Come on, you know I’m not going to club a baby seal.”
When Brooks left for LIV Golf, he never badmouthed the PGA Tour. He didn’t sue us or insult our intelligence by claiming he wanted to “grow the game.” He thought his career as a competitor was finished, his body too broken to continue, and made a business decision. I didn’t agree with it. His departure made our tour demonstrably worse, but he at least handled it in a palatable way.
If anything, he’s arguably been our tour’s biggest weapon against LIV Golf. Obviously, that’s what his return now signals about LIV’s overall state and lack of competitive credibility—that he’s willing to forfeit tens of millions rather than stay there. But the biggest blow he delivered came at the 2023 Masters, when he admitted his decision might have been different had he known he’d regain his health. How do you sell LIV Golf when one of your best players is publicly expressing that?!
There have been grumbles, of course, that Brooks can return without suspension. Wyndham Clark said, “If you would have told me that I could have gone for a year-and-a-half, made a boatload of money and then be able to come back, play on the tour, I think almost everyone would have done that.” Clark occupies a different position than most because he’s won a major, but his sentiment gets echoed through the locker room by players who haven’t. They don’t realize how much the major-championship component matters. Win one and you’re treated differently. Just ask Tyrrell Hatton and Joaquin Niemann, who’ve been LIV Golf’s best week-to-week players but remain stuck there. Second, the premise itself is flawed: Not everyone had the chance to go to LIV.
One thing that really grates me is this notion that “You would have taken the money, too.” It was never some free-for-all. Early on when LIV Golf was recruiting, months before Phil Mickelson’s comments nearly torpedoed the entire operation, I told my agent I wasn’t interested. I’d done my research, talked to my hometown chaplain and concluded it wasn’t the right thing to do. I nearly drove myself crazy worrying about where money would come from, whether it was dirty, what else it funded. I didn’t want to become a direct employee of things that contradict what I believe is right. I credit my wife for helping me get there.
'We became too much like the NBA, where the trade-rumor and player-movement economy generates more oxygen than the games themselves.'
My wife had asked, “How would you explain this to your mom, to our kids?” The fact that I’d need to justify it at all revealed my answer. So I told my agent, “Don’t even tell me the number.”
As it all dragged on, I lost count of how many people wanted to know what LIV offered me. Finally, I asked my agent. He didn’t mince words.
“They never made you an offer.”
Now, I’m a multiple-time tour winner. I thought that meant something, given LIV Golf was signing some guys who could barely hold down a card. The fact is, beyond the top 30 in the World Ranking and some internationals, most LIV Golf signings were orchestrated by player-management agencies. Look closely and you’ll find much of their non-marquee talent comes from the same few agencies. The next time you hear a rank-and-file player complain like Clark, bet that golfer probably never had an offer.
More From Golf Digest
Another thing that I do find annoying is the inflated “money lost” aspect of Brooks’ penalty. We’ve been told Brooks is surrendering upward of $90 million by coming back. Some of that is real cash with known values for FedEx Cup bonuses and charity donations, but a lot of it is theoretical in player equity. Sorry to roll my eyes, but remember the nine figures he already pocketed for playing three years at LIV? That $90 million number is an insult to our intelligence.
However, I give Brian Rolapp [PGA Tour CEO] credit here. If reunification ever materializes, the biggest challenge will be managing how LIV guys return. Many won’t have status, so how do you bring them back without inherently punishing those who stayed loyal? We don’t really need anyone from LIV Golf except for a handful of players. Rolapp’s advantage is that he’s new and can remake things as he sees fit. If this were Jay Monahan’s call, Brooks would still be in limbo. Need a sponsor to re-up for five years? Jay’s your guy. That’s not a knock. That was mostly the job when he inherited it, to appease everyone. But that’s also why he reacted to everything during the LIV Golf uprising rather than acting. Rolapp wanted Brooks, so he got Brooks.
Professional golfers are often called selfish. Frankly, I think we’re a lot like anyone else in that we view larger issues through the lens of how they affect us personally. In some ways, LIV Golf’s arrival has benefited us, forcing the tour to add money to our pockets. But I’m a golfer first, and I see how damaging the past five years has been for our sport.
This is supposed to be a gentleman’s game, and the golf wars brought out our worst impulses—the greed, the self-interest, the reduction of everything to dollar signs. With LIV Golf drama always in the news, we became too much like the NBA, where the trade-rumor and player-movement economy generates more oxygen than the games themselves. It’s all a compelling form of entertainment, sure, but when it eclipses the actual competition, it’s detrimental to the long-term health of what you’re building.
That’s why I’m OK with Brooks, and potentially other LIV guys, coming back. It’s not the end of LIV Golf, but it’s progress. —With Joel Beall
