PGA Tour winner doubles down on Brooks Koepka criticism: "He was a marquee legitimizer"

Former PGA Tour winner Brandel Chamblee has doubled down on his criticism of Brooks Koepka. 

The American has left LIV Golf to "prioritise the needs of his family". 

Five-time major winner Koepka, 36, controversially quit the PGA Tour amid the height of golf's schism in 2022. 

He went on to win win events on the PIF-backed breakaway - and also became the first LIV Golf player to win a major in 2023 - but has decided to call time with LIV despite having one year remaining on his contract. 

It is understood Koepka's decision "amicably and mutually agreed". 

Koepka's next steps are unclear, with some reports suggesting the golfer has already applied to be re-instated on the PGA Tour. 

The North American circuit deems LIV Golf events "unathuorized" and golfers that participate in them - even if they are not members - are subject to 12-month bans. 

This would mean Koepka would be eligible to return to the PGA Tour in August, but whether or not he would have to pay a fine to return is another matter that has not been decided. 

Before Christmas, Justin Thomas said players were "over" the disruption in the elite men's game and would like an answer over how to reintegrate LIV players back onto the PGA Tour. 

In a lengthy post on X, Chamblee said allowing Koepka to return without consequence would undermine the Tour's meritocratic principles and set a damaging precedent. 

Chamblee said Koepka's move to LIV Golf helped legitimize the league and disrupted professional golf's ecosystem. 

He suggested Koepka should be made to re-qualify for the PGA Tour or have limited season eligibility. 

"Forgiveness without cost is not reconciliation, it’s erasure," Chamblee said. "Reintegration is appropriate. Amnesia is not."

Chamblee's posted in full:

"A lot has been made about Brooks Koepka’s possible return to the PGA Tour, some even suggesting it should be made as convenient as possible for him given his popularity and success. I certainly disagree with this. 

"Allowing Brooks Koepka to return to the PGA Tour with no consequence, would undermine the very meritocratic foundations that make the PGA Tour legitimate - not because of who he is, but because of what his return with signal. 

"This is not about retribution, it is about precedent. 

"If Koepka can leave, helping to destabilize the ecosystem by joining LIV golf, and then return instantly because of talent or popularity— the message is clear: rules are for the replaceable, not the exceptional. This is corrosive. 

"LIV did not merely offer an alternative league, it fractured fields, diluted competitive meaning, triggered legal warfare, undermined sponsorship stability, and forced structural change across all of professional golf. 

"Koepka was not a passive bystander, he was a marquee legitimizer. You don’t punish him for being influential, but you cannot pretend his influence didn't matter. 

"His credibility made LIV viable, his stature normalized defection and his success (especially after joining LIV) validated the disruption.

"If success becomes a retroactive absolution, then the lesson is perverse: if you’re good enough consequences don't apply. This is the opposite of meritocracy. 

"A penalty would not so much be a punishment as it would be an acknowledgment of choice and the consequence does not need to be punitive to be meaningful. 

"He could be made to re-qualify for the PGA Tour (his 5 year exemption for winning the PGA Championship for majors may stand but not for the PGA Tour). 

"He could have limited season eligibility and/or a suspension tied to prior contracted breach. The players who stayed on the PGA Tour paid a price. 

"They had to absorb the uncertainty, play in weaker fields, shoulder reputational risk and take on a greater responsibility of protecting the tour's continuity.

"Allowing a frictionless return privileges those who left over those who stayed, which reverses the moral order. 

"Forgiveness without cost is not reconciliation, it's erasure. Reintegration is appropriate. Amnesia is not. This isn't about punishing Brooks Koepka. It is about whether the PGA Tour believe commitments mean something. 

"If elite players can destabilize the system, take guaranteed money and then return instantly because they are popular or successful, the message is that rules apply only to the expendable. 

"If excellence alone erases consequences then the PGA Tour ceases to be a meritocracy and becomes a marketplace of convenience. Great players most certainly deserve respect, but institutions deserve protection."

What happens next? Analysis

Brooks Koepka's departure from LIV Golf is genuinely a significant development. 

He is the first major champion to walk away from the lucrative league and what happens next will be fascinating to watch. 

The PGA Tour released a cryptic statement 20 minutes after news of Koepka's decision broke. 

Will they bend their rules to accommodate Koepka? 

It could be argued that LIV Golf's recruitment drive since they lured Jon Rahm and Tyrrell Hatton from the establishment has been underwhelming. 

Victor Perez, a three-time DP World Tour winner and former PGA Tour card holder, and England's Laurie Canter, are the only two players that have been recruited in the off-season. 

Koepka's departure means another spot will have to be filled. 

Will LIV's financiers double down and throw more money at an established player to try and stay relevant?

Or will they continue they continue to try and convince young professional golfers to start their careers with LIV?

Time will tell.