Without Bryson DeChambeau, LIV Golf Is Dead

In Fact or Fiction, the SI Golf team debates LIV without Bryson, whether the league should join up with another tour and if the Zurich Classic should be kept on future PGA Tour schedules.

Bryson DeChambeau needs a new contract just as LIV Golf appears to need a lifeline past this season. | Bill Streicher-Imagn Images

Welcome back to SI Golf’s Fact or Fiction, where we’re intrigued by the idea of alternate shot but terrified of playing it with friends.

Once again, we’re here to debate a series of statements for writers and editors to declare as “Fact” or “Fiction” along with a brief explanation. Responses may also (occasionally) be “Neutral” since there's a lot of gray area in golf.

Do you agree or disagree? Let us know on the SI Golf X account.

LIV Golf appears to be in a fight for survival with the Saudi Arabia PIF widely reported to be cutting off funding after this season. But the bottom line is this: no Bryson DeChambeau, no more LIV Golf. 

Bob Harig: FACT. The original idea behind LIV Golf (or the Premier Golf League) was to bring as many of the top players together, so you could showcase them in other places. To lose Bryson—perhaps among the game’s most popular players—makes that task nearly impossible.

Jeff Ritter: FACT. Oh, sure, it may exist in some form, but if LIV loses Bryson its relevance vanishes entirely.

Max Schreiber: FACT. LIV’s already not profitable, and barely anyone watches (49,000 viewers for last week’s final round). Bryson is its shining star, so if the PIF, as reported, pulls funding from the league after this season, why would anyone pick up the tab? (Frankly, why would anyone do it even with Bryson?)  

John Schwarb: FACT. LIV Golf is popular in Australia and South Africa but that’s not just because of homegrown players—fans also want to see American stars. If Bryson is gone, following Koepka and Reed, that leaves 55-year-old Phil Mickelson and Dustin Johnson as the top Americans. That’s not enough.

Dance partners may be hard to come by now, but LIV Golf should still look for some kind of deal with the PGA Tour or DP World Tour and try for co-sanctioned events.

Bob Harig: FACT. A deal with the PGA Tour and DP World Tour—in retrospect—always seemed like the best path. Why? Because it gave LIV, and to a larger degree, the PIF, acceptance in the game. To be treated as a competitor in a niche sport like golf is a very difficult road to travel.

Jeff Ritter: FACT. This is just good practice for any start-up: try to make more friends than enemies. Partners can help boost the bottom line in a number of ways, and LIV has done itself no favors by leaning into its rebel status.

Max Schreiber: FACT: Yes, LIV can save themselves by making a deal with the Tour, but the bigger question is: why would the PGAT want to deal with LIV? They’re doing fine on their own and have a truckload of SSG money that apparently hasn’t been touched yet. Besides getting Bryson, Rahm and a few more names back, the Tour doesn’t need the headache of trying to integrate with the LIV, especially with it reportedly knocking on death’s door. Now, with the DPWT, there might be something there. 

John Schwarb: FICTION. Survival looks like a long shot, but to some LIV’s rebelliousness (others would say obnoxiousness) is the attraction. We’ll soon find out if that’s bankable enough to see 2027. 

If LIV can keep DeChambeau and make ends meet on its own starting next year, it should be given a second chance by golf fans who were turned off on Day 1 due to the Saudi backing.

Bob Harig: FICTION. Golf fans who shunned LIV due to the Saudi backing are not going to change their minds. It’s beyond golf and always has been.

Jeff Ritter: FICTION. I think most fans have made up their minds by now. LIV has been a pretty solid hit in some of golf’s underserved markets. I’m not sure there’s any reason to believe U.S. interest will change much moving forward.

Max Schreiber: FICTION. The product is still terrible. Why the heck would anyone want to watch Rahm, Bryson and a few Ryder Cup heroes of yesteryear tee it up against … well, anything I say here to describe the makeup of LIV will be disparaging, so I'll end my answer here.  

John Schwarb: NEUTRAL. The Saudi backing was always going to be a non-starter with a percentage of fans and there was nothing LIV could do about that. If it can pivot to another benefactor, perhaps some would look at the league differently. But that's a long shot within a long shot.

This week’s team-game Zurich Classic is plagued by a weak field, sandwiched between signature events and majors. But as PGA Tour CEO Brian Rolapp continues to reimagine the Tour schedule, the Zurich should be kept.

Bob Harig: FICTION. There’s nothing wrong with the event but in a new world with signature events that Rolapp unveiled, this seems destined for second-tier status. And that is fine. If so, the event should lean into it more by perhaps reducing it to 54 holes and playing a different format every day. The tournament doesn’t get OWGR points or a Masters invite so why not be a little more creative?

The Zurich Classic will be one tournament to watch as the PGA Tour reimagines its schedule. | Matthew Hinton-Imagn Images

Jeff Ritter: FICTION. I really liked this team-event concept when it first launched. But at minimum it needs a new date. And perhaps some format tweaks would also add some juice. But in its current form this event feels like it’s on the block.

Max Schreiber: FICTION. This is the worst event of the season. It’s gimmicky (doesn’t even award world ranking points), attracts a lackluster field, to say the least, and is played on an uninspiring course. Maybe it could have some juice if it’s played in the fall, or something, with stars. 

John Schwarb: FACT. Obviously the Zurich is never going to thrive as a filler between far bigger events, but the format is still a welcome change of pace and I’d miss it if it’s gone. Maybe it could be a fall event?