Tour Confidential: Koepka’s return, Rolapp’s leadership, LIV’s next move

Check-in every week for the unfiltered opinions of our writers and editors as they break down the hottest topics in sports and join the conversation by tweeting us at @golf_com. This week we discuss Brooks Koepka’s return to the PGA Tour, how the Tour made it possible and how LIV might respond.

Big news shocked the golf world on Monday when the PGA Tour announced a new “Returning Member Program” that would allow a select number of players who fell under a certain criteria to rejoin the Tour with a number of penalties and conditions, and that Brooks Koepka had already accepted. What do you think ultimately led to Koepka’s return?

Josh Berhow, Editor-in-Chief (@Josh_Berhow): I don’t think he was ever truly happy at LIV, or at least it didn’t take long for him to realize that wasn’t the case. Sure, the money was good, but we know Koepka thrives on competition and it simply wasn’t as good or meaningful on LIV. That’s why he was so good at the majors, and I think that was tough for him. And while the LIV schedule is not as frequent as the PGA Tour, it is more international travel, which can also be taxing and taxing for someone with a young family. You also have to wonder, since Scottie Scheffler has won 13 times in the last two years, if that motivated him at all. He wants to be compared to the best and no one is better than Scottie right now.

Josh Sens, senior writer (@joshssens): Before moving to LIV, Koepka made it clear that he wasn’t all that interested in regular Tour events. They didn’t fire him. Ironically, he then jumped to a track where every event must have felt like this to him. It was clear he wanted to get back into a more competitive mix.

Josh Schrock, news editor (@Schrock_and_awe): Brooks admitted that he initially went to LIV because of the uncertainty surrounding his health. He never chose to be a “LIV guy” the way Bryson DeChambeau did. He took the money, but he didn’t do it like a great soldier in professional golf’s civil war. He quickly grew tired of the idea and once he won the 2023 PGA, it seemed like he really regretted the initial decision. Think Berhow makes a good point about Scheffler’s dominance. Add in the fact that Rory McIlroy has won the Grand Slam in his career and it is clear that Koepka wanted to come back to compete against the best and feel better prepared to reassert himself as a force at major championships.

After winning the 2023 PGA Championship, Koepka has failed to finish in the top 10 in his last 10 major starts, including missing three of four cuts last year. Now that we’re back on the PGA Tour, do you expect Koepka to return to his former, world-famous self?

Berhow: I wouldn’t be surprised if he bounces back a bit. I don’t expect another year with three missed cuts, but I do think he’ll find slightly better form now that he’s in a better place personally and playing more regularly. But don’t discount motivation. He knows that eyes will now be on him and would like to prove to the people that he has not lost a step.

Schrock: Yes. I think preparing for the Masters in Houston or San Antonio and not having to fly to Singapore and South Africa before Augusta should make him sharper and more rested for the big weeks. After a few years of sub-par big performances, I expect Koepka will be motivated to silence his ‘doubters’ again.

Three other LIV players – Jon Rahm, Bryson DeChambeau and Cameron Smith – also have the option to return, although they must decide by February 2. Last week they said in press conferences that they remained committed to LIV, although there is still time to turn around. Do you think anyone would want that?

Berhow: I don’t think we’ll see it, even if the chance isn’t quite zero. I don’t see Cam Smith turning around. Bryson has one year left on his contract and while his tone at the press conference was: aheminteresting, he could play it out and see where he is in a year. This also gives him a lot of leverage. If there’s anyone I think could turn around, it could be Rahm. He said a few days ago that he wasn’t interested, but he still has two weeks to think about it. And time is a dangerous thing for the mind.

Feeling: Agreed, Jos. Rahm would be the man. And as we’ve seen more than once in the LIV era, what players say they’re going to do isn’t always what they end up doing.

Schrock: Rahm is the one all eyes should be on, but we don’t know what his contract looks like and what punishment he faces if he tries to escape. I think he’ll be back, but it won’t be before February 2nd.

The fine print of this rule said that only winners of the Players or majors since 2022 would be allowed to return, notably leaving out other big winners like Phil Mickelson, Dustin Johnson, Patrick Reed and Sergio Garcia, including non-major winners but big names like Tyrrell Hatton and Joaquin Niemann. Why was it so specific when it could have been modified to allow for more?

Berhow: The Tour knows its product is star-powered and these are the guys – especially Koepka, Rahm and DeChambeau – who can really make a difference. Plus, given everything that happened between the Tour and Mickelson, this seemed like a not-so-subtle way to bash him. If the big names leave LIV, it will hurt a lot more than a handful of top 50 guys. You could even argue that making this group so small puts more pressure on them to make a decision because they don’t want to be the big name left behind.

Feeling: The Tour-LIV battle has always been about the big names. This was clearly a game for the guys with the most wattage. That it was also structured in such a way that Mickelson was explicitly left out must have been a particularly satisfying bonus for the people in Ponte Vedra.

Schrock: Brian Rolapp correctly identified the players who have legitimate value to the PGA Tour. That’s Bryson, Rahm and Brooks. Cam Smith fits into the category they created to shoehorn in the other three. Rolapp is trying to walk a tightrope by bringing back players who will improve the PGA Tour’s product without disrupting its current membership. We saw Wyndham Clark say he was “very torn” that Koepka was allowed back with what he considered a light punishment. But I think players can understand that there are different rules for players who have reached a certain level of success in the game. It’s a lot harder to sell some of the constituency on opening the doors to LIV’s non-elite players than it is to Koepka, Rahm and DeChambeau.

In his short time as CEO of the PGA Tour, Brian Rolapp has already made a major impact. Are you surprised at how quickly he acts? And if you’re an experienced PGA Tour player, are you happy, annoyed or indifferent about this move?

Berhow: This is the perfect example of why it was probably helpful to bring in someone from outside the sport (like Rolapp, from the NFL) who made it simple and said we had to find a way to get our best players back. I can’t imagine this step being taken a year or two ago, when it seemed like the sentiment was more, “we don’t need you.” As for the fellow Tour players, I’m sure it’s a mixed reaction, but they won’t be pushed out of the events and that’s probably all they care about. Those who may have more reason to be angry are those who were offered lucrative LIV contracts, turned them down and now realize they could have done both.

Feeling: Rolapp promised from day 1 that he would shake things up. Unsurprisingly, he made good on his word. It was also easier to create a play like this because the climate surrounding the Civil War has changed so dramatically. The cries of ethical outrage over LIV and the source of its money are long gone. It’s all about winning the battle now, not about maintaining the moral high ground.

Schrock: Not surprised at all. Rolapp is an NFL guy. He carries none of the baggage that Jay Monahan and the rest of the old PGA Tour leadership carry with LIV. He wants to improve the PGA Tour and make more money for everyone. That’s how the NFL operates and that’s how he will run the PGA Tour. If I’m a player in the middle who hasn’t turned down a big offer from LIV to jump, then I’m not worried about this move. It makes the Tour better and Koepka doesn’t take anyone’s place and isn’t eligible for sponsor invites to the Signature Events.

Was Monday’s news bigger for the PGA Tour or worse for LIV Golf? And what does LIV Golf do now, especially as more players flip?

Berhow: Even worse for LIV. It hurt the Tour when Rahm left a few years ago, but LIV has never done a splashy signing since. Now they are losing one of their few key players, and if even one of the three collapses in the next two weeks it would be disastrous. What is LIV doing now? They’ve moved to 72 holes and reapplied for world ranking points, which they need more than ever. A few more stars wouldn’t hurt either, but at this point it almost seems like loyalty has been forged for so many.

Sens: Worse for LIV. The competition wants to be seen as more than a well-funded novelty act. It wants to be seen as competitively relevant. It should attract big names and not lose them.

Schrock: It’s even worse for LIV. Over the offseason, they reportedly failed to land the likes of Akshay Bhatia and Si Woo Kim, and now they’ve seen one of their big names walk back across the battlefield to the PGA Tour. If they lose Rahm or Bryson, it will likely end the civil strife in golf. They will limp forward and keep going because they have bottomless funds and have gained some popularity in markets like Australia, but with a roster of older former stars and young bees, their dream of overtaking the PGA Tour will be buried even deeper than it is now.

“>