![\"Getty](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/522c61558d7028c7649d635d0e9ab8ee.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Bryson DeChambeau in December at DJ Khaled’s golf event.Getty Images<\/p>\n
We started with the NFL.<\/p>\n
Of course we did. This is Super Bowl week<\/a>. Pats and Hawks! Bad Bunny<\/a>! Commercials! Quit hogging the dip! But the thing is, though, every week feels like a super week in pro football. Regular season! NFL draft! Signings! Every week seems meaningful.<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n Even when it\u2019s tough to watch.<\/p>\n This season, Dave Berri\u2019s Detroit Lions were predicted to contend. But players got hurt. And the Motor City faithful suffered. Please trust that the analysis that follows was spoken in a pained tone.<\/p>\n \u201cI think in one game \u2014 against the Vikings \u2014 their starting center came off the practice squad,\u201d Berri said. \u201cAnd you\u2019re like, \u2018Well, I don\u2019t think you\u2019re going to win this game.\u2019 I think they could have just said, \u2018Well, probably not.\u2019 I don\u2019t know that you can block the Vikings defensive line with a practice squad center. And then he left the team three days later, so there you go.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd then they were telling me, Jared Goff, you didn\u2019t play a very good game. \u2018Well, I only had one second to throw the ball. I mean, he is the center. He is pretty close to the other team. So I don\u2019t know what you wanted me to do about that.\u2019 So, yeah, it was just, games like that, I don\u2019t know what you want us to do. I wish coaches could just say that. It\u2019s like, they\u2019re different players. Those aren\u2019t the players I want playing. There\u2019s a reason why they were on the practice squad.\u201d<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n Poor Berri, right? And yes, you\u2019re still on a golf site.<\/p>\n Berri\u2019s other job is in sports economics<\/a>. He teaches it. He\u2019s written books and articles about it. He\u2019s established himself as one of the country\u2019s authorities on the subject. A couple years ago, I talked with him<\/a>, and I felt it was right to do so again, considering all of the news around golf and money \u2014 and football. We talked about the PGA Tour and its new CEO, Brian Rolapp \u2014 who came from the NFL. We talked about YouTube \u2014 which now broadcasts NFL games. We talked about LIV Golf and Saudi Arabia \u2014 where the NFL is hosting an event in March<\/a>. We talked about Bryson DeChambeau \u2014 who\u2019s in the midst of contract talks not unlike a quarterback or defensive end.<\/p>\n We also wondered whether pro golf could become appointment viewing \u2014 in the way that it is for the NFL.<\/p>\n Regardless of how the play is.<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n (Editor\u2019s note: The interview has been lightly condensed.)<\/p>\n Brian Rolapp in August at the Tour Championship. Getty Images <\/p>\n I. THE PGA TOUR \u2014 AND ITS NEW CEO<\/strong><\/p>\n Last June, the PGA Tour named Brian Rolapp as its CEO<\/a>. Who\u2019s Rolapp? An NFL man, he\u2019d been thought of as a potential successor to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell (and he still might be). But now Rolapp is in golf, and over the past few months, he\u2019s created a \u201cFuture Competition Committee\u201d aimed at examining the Tour\u2019s competitive model and developed a pathway for Brooks Koepka to return<\/a> to the Tour after a four-season stint with LIV Golf.\u00a0<\/p>\n Last year, the PGA Tour hired the second-in-command of the NFL as the PGA Tour\u2019s first-ever CEO. What can pro golf take from the NFL model? What should it ignore?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n I\u2019m going to argue pretty much nothing. This is a totally different sport. The difficulty is, going from the NFL to the PGA Tour, is that football is a very, very good television sport. I don\u2019t know if golf has quite the same television appeal. I think there\u2019s a ceiling to how many people are going to tune in to watch golf. And I don\u2019t know how you change that. Despite the amount of coverage it gets, it\u2019s never been one of the major sports. It gets a lot of attention because it does appeal to executives, right? The people who make decisions love golf. But I don\u2019t know that it\u2019s the kind of sport that you\u2019re going to get \u2014 the Super Bowl is going to have 150 million people tune in to watch this, right? I don\u2019t know how you\u2019re going to get that for golf. People are aware of who Tiger Woods is and stuff like that, but the number of people who tune into this is somewhat small, and I don\u2019t know how he\u2019s going to change that. It\u2019s been around a long time. People are aware of it. I just don\u2019t see what specifically you can do that\u2019s going to dramatically change the model. Introduce defense?<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n One of Rolapp\u2019s pillars is scarcity. This year, there are <\/strong>fewer players<\/strong><\/a> who have received full-time playing privileges, and there are rumors that, starting next year, there will be <\/strong>fewer tournaments<\/strong><\/a>. The thought is the PGA Tour right now runs essentially from January all the way through Thanksgiving, where there is really no offseason, whereas Major League Baseball has an offseason, NFL does, NBA does \u2014 to where you then miss it. Like where opening day in baseball is an event. Like week one of the NFL is an event. Is less play better or worse for the product?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n I think there\u2019s an argument to be made that if you make it more scarce, then people are going to value more what they do get to see and that\u2019s not a ridiculous argument. That\u2019s OK. Is that going to dramatically change anything? I don\u2019t think that\u2019s going to happen. It\u2019s a small change that could theoretically help. I think the counter argument is there\u2019s a value in having it on all the time. If you look at the NFL, the NFL was scarce. It was very scarce. It used to be, if you want to watch an NFL football game, it was on Sunday. And then they moved it to Monday night, right? And that was a big change. And then they didn\u2019t really do much after that for a long time. And now they have it so that there\u2019s NFL games on Thursdays and Fridays and Saturdays and Sundays and Mondays. Has that made the NFL worse? I don\u2019t know. I don\u2019t think that\u2019s true. And they do the same with college football. I mean, college football is on almost every night now. And so I don\u2019t know that that\u2019s made it worse. It is the case that if you have a lot of events, then your ratings for each one will likely be lower because people are not going to commit themselves to seven days a week watching something. But I think your overall viewership would probably be higher because you have more events you\u2019re selling and the amount of attention people are paying to you might be higher. So I can see what he\u2019s saying. I think that could help. I don\u2019t know that that dramatically changes anything.<\/p>\n As you said, Sunday\u2019s a big thing, Monday night\u2019s a big thing, Thursday night\u2019s become a must-watch event. What could the PGA Tour try to do to duplicate that?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Yeah, that\u2019s a tough one. One issue that you have with the PGA Tour, and it\u2019s the same problem that afflicts cricket, is that you don\u2019t have an event that lasts three hours and decides the winner. It\u2019s a four-day event. And that requires some level of commitment on the part of the viewer. And you could say, well, just tune in the last day. But there\u2019s stuff that went on before that. The solution they came up with in cricket was the T20 approach<\/a> where you change the game so it\u2019s a three-hour event. And that seems to have worked. So one option is create events where instead of it\u2019s a four-day tournament, go, OK, we\u2019re going to do a three-hour.<\/p>\n Grant Horvat last March at the Players Championship. Getty Images <\/p>\n II. YOUTUBE \u2014 AND WHY IT\u2019S SUCH A PHENOMENON\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n YouTube\u2019s popularity has exploded, especially so in golf. Good Good. Bob Does Sports. Grant Horvat. The Bryan Bros. And many more. This past summer, there was also an International Invitational<\/a>, hosted by Bob Does Sports and Barstool Sports, which attracted hundreds of thousands of views.\u00a0<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n To me, YouTube golf has become as popular as it is because it\u2019s fast, it\u2019s digestible.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n The advantage of YouTube is this \u2014 I\u2019m going to give you a totally different way of thinking about this. So if you look at the rise of K-pop<\/a> and how that happened, K-pop takes off internationally when YouTube becomes a thing. And the reason why YouTube is crucial to the story is because prior to YouTube, the only way you could get your music on the radio or on MTV was if a decision-maker decided to put it there. And the problem is the decision-maker has their own tastes. And their own preferences. And so they\u2019re going to put on what they like. And we have this idea that network executives know what the audience wants. We have countless examples of network executives having no idea what the audience wants, and they\u2019re totally shocked when they put something on there. When you do YouTube, though, YouTube is a different model. Now the viewer gets to decide. You decide what you want to listen to. And suddenly K-pop becomes this huge thing because everyone individually chooses what they want. And so when you create a product for YouTube, you\u2019re allowing the audience to decide what they want themselves, rather than the network executive saying, \u2018I have so much time at ABC or ESPN or whatever, and I\u2019m going to dedicate this amount to that.\u2019 And that can completely transform what you\u2019re doing. You have to be responsive to what the YouTube audience wants, right? You have to pay attention to that because they\u2019re choosing it themselves. They\u2019re not letting the network do it for them.<\/p>\n Is there anything pro golf can take from YouTube?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n I don\u2019t know. I think the advantage is you\u2019re letting the viewers pick what they want, so if you give them a menu of things, you\u2019re going to find faster what they like and what they don\u2019t like better than what an executive could do. Because executives again are making decisions based on their personal preferences and they are absolutely convinced that they know the answer, they know what people want, but history says they don\u2019t. How to convert that to a sports model is challenging, though. Because, again, they have to be live. I do think there\u2019s some value if the PGA Tour could come up with events that really were in a shorter time frame. We\u2019re going to have you play 18 holes. Or even just do nine holes. See what happens. Nine-hole pressure. I wonder if you could create a golf course \u2014 here\u2019s an idea: Create a golf course where things are like par-6 or par-7. So make it so it\u2019s longer, right? And do like nine of them. I mean, you can think about making events so it\u2019s like, I\u2019m going to highlight this particular aspect of golf. Maybe you create a course that makes the putting more difficult. Maybe you make the course that makes hitting the drives more difficult. Things like that. You could create a whole tour where you\u2019re saying these events are going to focus on these skills, but these events will focus on these other skills.<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n There\u2019s just all sorts of things you could do, but you have to create it so that the event is shorter in time period, because longer time periods, you\u2019re really just appealing to your major fans. You\u2019re not not appealing to the average fan. You got to bring the casual fan into the thing. That\u2019s why the NFL works so well. Casual fans can watch it. You don\u2019t have to know a whole lot about the intricacies of football to watch football. You can see what\u2019s going on. They\u2019re at the 30-yard line. I can see it. They ran a play. They got four yards. They just said it, I saw it, there you go. You don\u2019t need to know, well, do you see how they got the four yards? Do you see the left tackle pulled on it? I don\u2019t give a crap. You got to create events that bring in casual fans. You can\u2019t focus on the hardcore fans. This is where the NHL went wrong. So many years ago in the NHL, they did this thing with the purple puck where you could see where the puck was. And the hardcore fans got pissed off with that. \u2018I can see where the puck is.\u2019 Yeah, most people can\u2019t. Most people don\u2019t know where it is. And so that really helps. \u2018Yeah, I don\u2019t like it.\u2019 So they got rid of it. You know what, this isn\u2019t for you. You\u2019re going to watch regardless. I don\u2019t need to make you happy. Hockey also suffers from a problem in that you do have to watch. It isn\u2019t like football or baseball where it can be on in the background and you can look at the score every once in a while and go, \u2018Oh, I got an idea what\u2019s going on.\u2019<\/p>\n If you look at the hockey television ratings, they are persistently very low. It does really well in person. They sell out the arenas very consistently, but the ratings on television are terrible. And they\u2019ve always been terrible because they construct the broadcast to appeal to the hardcore hockey fan and they don\u2019t do it to appeal to the casual hockey fan, and if you\u2019re going to build up a sport, it\u2019s always the casual fan that matters. That\u2019s what baseball\u2019s been trying to do. They had a problem with pitchers just sort of milling around on the mound and not doing anything. And people were like, It\u2019s kind of boring watching him take 45 seconds to throw the damn pitch. Put in a pitch clock.<\/p>\n I think that shot clock is one of the best sports \u2018inventions\u2019 since maybe the three-point line.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n It makes the game much faster, and it gets them focused on what they\u2019re doing. And you\u2019re like, OK, that\u2019s good, I like that. That\u2019s the kind of thing that you want to do. The whole notion that the crowd has to be quiet when golfers are playing? Every other athlete has to hear noise. You can yell if you want. I think that might make it more interesting. Let \u2019em yell, let \u2019em see what happens.<\/p>\n Yasir Al-Rumayyan and Jon Rahm in August at LIV Golf\u2019s team championship. Getty Images <\/p>\n III. LIV GOLF \u2014 AND HOW LONG THE SAUDIS WILL BACK IT\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n This week, LIV Golf started its fifth season, and there are questions on its future, as there are with any new sports league. The central one, though, is this: Will its primary backer, the Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund, continue to support the circuit?<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n The last time we talked, the PGA Tour had taken money from <\/strong>a sports ownership group<\/strong><\/a> and that came after a preliminary deal <\/strong>between the Tour and the Saudi PIF<\/strong><\/a>. That is currently still being negotiated and might not see the light of day. At one point last year, Donald Trump met with the Saudi PIF governor, but nothing has happened. So the question I have is, what are the benefits and detractions to looking into Saudi investment in American sports?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n The Saudis are looking for things to invest in because the oil industry is not eternal. At some point, that\u2019s going to be a problem for them. And there\u2019s a huge attraction for rich people being involved in sports. And if you can\u2019t play sports, I guess the next best thing is to buy the sports. So that\u2019s why they\u2019re doing it. The problem is, the Saudis tried to create a brand-new golf league by itself, which I think I told you wasn\u2019t going to work, and it doesn\u2019t seem like it\u2019s working. You just can\u2019t do that. There\u2019s no tradition. You can\u2019t just take people and stick them in a tournament that looks the same as every other tournament and say, well, now they\u2019re going to compete over here doing this. It\u2019s like, I don\u2019t know what it is they\u2019re fighting for. The Masters means something because there\u2019s a history to it. But creating another league is probably not going to work If it\u2019s the same product, which I think it was, right? Four-day tournaments, right?<\/p>\n Yeah, they bumped it up from <\/strong>three days to four<\/strong><\/a> this year.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Yeah, see, that\u2019s the same thing. You\u2019re doing exactly the same product. If they wanted to do something, what they should have done is what we were just talking about a moment ago. You know, create a bunch of contests that are totally different. But if you just do exactly the same thing, but there\u2019s no tradition, well, I don\u2019t think you\u2019re going to have any audience then. It\u2019s not the players by themselves. There\u2019s the history that matters. What the past players did matters. If there\u2019s no history, then it matters less. And the audience doesn\u2019t have an idea why it\u2019s significant. Why does this matter? And so that was the problem the Saudis have. So I understand what they were trying to do. But it was unlikely that was going to be terrifically successful. And you can see now the top stars moving back to the PGA Tour because well, money\u2019s nice, but at the end of the day, you are a professional athlete. You do want to compete against the best, and you want people to pay attention to you.<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n Last year, <\/strong>it was reported<\/strong><\/a> that LIV Golf was losing money at a clip of nine figures a year, though recently the CEO of LIV Golf said that the league could <\/strong>turn a profit in five to 10 years<\/strong><\/a>. My question is, how long does Saudi Arabia stick with LIV? Do they believe in it no matter what, or do they eventually pull the plug?<\/strong><\/p>\n I don\u2019t know. They have an immense amount of money. The amount of money that they\u2019re spending on this is quite small, relative to what money they have. So therefore, they could do it indefinitely if they want, if that\u2019s what they like. It\u2019s really up to their preferences. I don\u2019t believe, and I said this to you before, I don\u2019t think they\u2019re doing it to make a profit. They already have money. They\u2019re not trying to make money. They do want an audience. I think they want people to pay attention to them. And if that doesn\u2019t happen, then I don\u2019t think they want to keep doing that. That CEO telling you \u2014 how exactly are you planning on making a profit in 10 years? What do you think is going to happen? This is where an academic would be like, I don\u2019t see how that\u2019s possible. Where are you getting that from? What is your analytical tool that tells you that that\u2019s going to happen? That just doesn\u2019t seem very likely from where you\u2019re starting. How are you going to get an audience? If you don\u2019t have an audience now and your stars are leaving you, why do you think you\u2019re going to have an audience 10 years from now? Are the stars going to come back? You didn\u2019t have much of an audience with the stars. You\u2019ll have less of an audience without the stars. But how long will they do it? As long as they want to do it. They have the money. I think what matters to them more than anything is, is anyone paying attention?<\/p>\n Bryson DeChambeau on Thursday at LIV Golf\u2019s Riyadh event. Getty Images <\/p>\n IV. BRYSON DECHAMBEAU \u2014\u00a0AND HIS CONTRACT\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n In 2022, Bryson DeChambeau was among the players who signed deals to leave the PGA Tour and join LIV Golf, and that contract is expiring<\/a> at the end of the year. DeChambeau figures to have significant leverage in the negotiations, which begs the question: How much will he ask for from LIV, should he want to return?<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n When LIV formed in 2022, many of its stars signed contracts that are now expiring, including Bryson DeChambeau. And in that time, <\/strong>Jon Rahm signed<\/strong><\/a> for what\u2019s been reported as a nine figure deal. And <\/strong>Brooks Koepka and Patrick Reed<\/strong><\/a> left to return to the PGA Tour. And LIV continues to try to gain a foothold. And DeChambeau won a U.S. Open and developed a significant YouTube presence. Given all of that, how much money could DeChambeau demand?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Oh, I don\u2019t know. I have no idea. I mean, it\u2019s obviously a lot more than [Rahm\u2019s]. Again, the problem is, if you\u2019re thinking about this in terms of a business like a Taco Bell, and you\u2019re thinking about revenues and costs and how much revenue this person brings in and what they\u2019re worth to me, the answer would be they wouldn\u2019t pay him much of anything because there\u2019s not really much revenue being generated. But that\u2019s clearly not what they\u2019re doing. I mean, they\u2019re trying to build something here. They can\u2019t afford to lose more stars. And they also have this incredibly large sum of money that they can throw at this. And so when that\u2019s the case, how much money can you command?<\/p>\n Could he ask for a billion dollars?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n I would. I would ask for $2 billion. I would just throw it out there. \u2018$2 billion. What do you got? $2 billion. You got $2 billion?\u2019 I mean, they have $2 billion. And let\u2019s see if they counter.<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n Has there ever been an athlete who has had that much leverage?<\/strong><\/p>\n No, in the sense because you\u2019re dealing with \u2014 what is the amount of money they have to invest in this? What do the Saudis have?<\/p>\n The PIF is the funding behind it, and it has <\/strong>over $1 trillion<\/strong><\/a>.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n OK, so you have $1 trillion. OK, now think about that. So you think about a typical owner of a sports team. Typical owner of a sports team might have $10 billion. You have $1 trillion. And you\u2019re desperate. I\u2019d demand $2 billion. I\u2019d demand $3 billion. That\u2019s $3 billion. \u2018You have $1 trillion, give me $3 billion.\u2019 \u2018You know, I\u2019m not doing it.\u2019 \u2018Well, then I\u2019m not playing.\u2019 So, you know, I would demand just the most ridiculous sum of money possible because none of the revenue or cost issues make any difference. You\u2019re doing this because you want to gain an entry into the space. And without a star, it won\u2019t happen. So your decision is, how much are you going to pay me to make this happen for you? And if the answer is, you\u2019re not willing to, well, then I don\u2019t do it. Then you try it on your own. Good luck with that. It also depends on how much he wants to do it. I mean, how much do you want to actually continue participating in this? I would just throw out some ridiculous money.<\/p>\n Jeeno Thitikul last week at the LPGA\u2019s Tournament of Champions. Getty Images <\/p>\n V. THE LPGA \u2014 AND A WNBA MOMENT\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Popularity in women\u2019s sports has skyrocketed, especially so in the WNBA. Can the LPGA, under new commissioner Craig Kessler<\/a>, capture that attention, or even surpass it?<\/p>\n Advertisement<\/p>\n You\u2019ve written extensively on the WNBA. And my question is, how can the LPGA duplicate that type of success?<\/strong><\/p>\n The WNBA success came about \u2014 and I think is what happened \u2014 is that we had Covid and the women\u2019s basketball in college and men\u2019s basketball in college both went to bubbles. And Sedona Prince<\/a> does the video and says, look, the bubbles aren\u2019t equal. They built a giant weight room for the men. They didn\u2019t build anything for the women. They gave them a tower of dumbbell racks. And as a result of that, the NCAA investigates itself, and there is a legal team that looks at them and they issue a report and there\u2019s a whole bunch of media coverage and then suddenly, within months, there is a change in how women\u2019s college basketball gets covered. Suddenly, for the first time in history, the network puts a regular-season game on the networks. That had never happened before. Suddenly they\u2019re telling the women, you can call your tournament March Madness, just like the men\u2019s. Suddenly, the entire tournament for the women is on television. That was not the case before that. Or at least, it wasn\u2019t the case for much of its history. So suddenly, college basketball becomes accessible and had not been accessible before. And not surprisingly, within a year or so of that happening, one of the players becomes a massive star. Caitlin Clark becomes a huge star. And the way they report this is, oh, we discovered Caitlin Clark and now we started covering this. No, I can see in the data that you started covering it first and then Caitlin Clark became the star. That is exactly how it always goes. It\u2019s always the coverage first and the star second. It\u2019s not the star first and then the coverage. Then Caitlin Clark moved to the WNBA, and the networks go, you know what, we should be covering that. There\u2019s a lot of interest in this. And then the WNBA gets a whole bunch more coverage. And people are like, in 2024, it\u2019s Caitlin Clark. Well, then in 2025, Caitlin Clark gets hurt. But they kept the coverage the same and the ratings go up even higher. And you\u2019re like, it was never Caitlin Clark. It was just the coverage changed.<\/p>\n So how can the LPGA duplicate that? Well, you somehow have to change the coverage. And how do you change the coverage? Well, that\u2019s the real problem that they have. How do you change the coverage? How do you get it so that you get the same kind of consistent, I\u2019m-on-television-all-the-time coverage. Think about the way the media covers the final of the major tournaments on the men\u2019s side and how they cover the ones on the women\u2019s side. The volume of stories is going to be a lot higher on the men\u2019s side. If you don\u2019t have the same kind of media attention, if you\u2019re just reporting the winner, if you\u2019re not doing the coverage consistently as it goes along, it\u2019s going to limit your fan appeal. But I do think if we go back to the whole diversity issue, given the fact the LPGA is more diverse, there\u2019s a bigger audience potentially there if you could get them to pay attention to it. I think that makes a difference. So I think there\u2019s a lot of stories that you could tell on the women\u2019s side. But you have to want to do that.<\/p>\n When there was more media coverage of the WNBA, they told the Caitlin Clark story, they told other players\u2019 stories. Is there a way that the LPGA can market its players to get to that level?<\/strong><\/p>\n Absolutely. And the advantage of golf is the same advantage tennis has. The athletes are individuals and therefore the audience relates to them very rapidly. See, that\u2019s the problem in team sports. Team sports, at the end of the day, you\u2019re asking somebody to form an emotional attachment to something that\u2019s entirely fictitious. There is no such thing as an Indiana Fever. That doesn\u2019t exist. There\u2019s no such thing as a Boston Celtic. Those things don\u2019t exist. But when you\u2019re doing tennis or golf or boxing, that\u2019s a person. And if you can simply get the audience to connect to the person, where either they like the person or they don\u2019t like the person \u2014 I\u2019m rooting for them or I\u2019m rooting against them \u2014 either way, you\u2019re paying attention. So the way to do it is to find a way to get it so the audience has some kind of emotional attachment to that person. Tell the person\u2019s story. Was there some sort of struggle that led them to become a golfer? Are there issues here that we should know about? Are there rivalries that we should know about? And that\u2019s what happens in tennis, right? Tennis is you get to know the personalities of the players and it allows you to connect with who you\u2019re watching. And that\u2019s the key, right? That\u2019s the key.<\/p>\n The post Will Bryson get a billion? And what the LPGA needs. An authority has thoughts<\/a> appeared first on Golf<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Bryson DeChambeau in December at DJ Khaled’s golf event.Getty Images We started with the NFL. Of course we…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":573499,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[47],"tags":[42850,10125,233,9000,1430,11343,1456,62,238397,67,132,68,3894],"class_list":["post-573498","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-golf","tag-brian-rolapp","tag-bryson-dechambeau","tag-caitlin-clark","tag-detroit-lions","tag-golf","tag-jared-goff","tag-pga-tour","tag-sports","tag-the-nfl","tag-united-states","tag-unitedstates","tag-us","tag-youtube"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/116030924837150684","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/573498","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=573498"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/573498\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/573499"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=573498"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=573498"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=573498"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"Brian](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/4fafefb4f8c58dbecc99f988bdece66a.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n![\"Grant](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/5864bb895f62db633fbc6206a802503e.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n![\"Yasir](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/c1f5e2205586d19be9b45408208bee9a.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n![\"Bryson](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/1b54c06378834462e016727998719903.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n![\"Jeeno](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/01ff8080cc5d40d4454e44e3537afe3e.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n