Rickie Fowler finished 101st in the 2024 FedExCup standings—far from the top 50 cut-off that grants automatic entry to the PGA Tour’s elite signature events. Yet somehow, he teed it up in six of them this season. The math doesn’t add up, and Brandel Chamblee isn’t staying quiet about it.

Signature events are supposed to be the tour’s crown jewels. Limited fields, $20 million purses, and a spot reserved only for those who’ve earned it. But Fowler’s presence—and Jordan Spieth’s too—sparked a question many fans were already asking: has merit lost its meaning?

During “The Favorite Chamblee” podcast, Chamblee and co-host Bailey Chamblee dug into that very issue. Sitting alongside Golf Magazine’s Claire Rogers, they explored whether the PGA Tour is bending too far toward star power. That’s when Chamblee zeroed in on Fowler and Spieth, two of golf’s most popular names—and two of its most controversial exemptions.

Fowler’s case came first. He earned sponsor exemptions into six signature events in 2025, collecting over $1.2 million and 319 FedExCup points from those starts. Those points accounted for nearly half of his season total. Spieth’s numbers told a similar story. He finished 73rd in 2024, then entered five signature events through sponsor exemptions. By season’s end, he’d gathered 254 of his 865 total points from those invites, or about 29% of his haul, according to one report.

Chamblee didn’t mince words on the show.

“It was based upon popularity. And if we really do believe the PGA Tour is merit-based, then it shouldn’t be popularity-based to the extent that it is right now.”

He recognized Fowler’s solid play this season. Still, his point stood—playing well once inside the gates doesn’t erase how you got invited in the first place. Chamblee wasn’t attacking Fowler or Spieth personally. He made that clear, too.

“I love them. I’d fight to have sponsor exemptions for them. But if it truly is going to be merit-based, and these signature events are that important, then there has to be a line.”

That line, Chamblee argued, is being blurred by the very system designed to reward excellence.

Top Stories

Tiger Woods’ Treatment of Caddies Set Him Apart from PGA Tour Rivals, Confesses Steve Williams

Rickie Fowler Comes Clean on Health Issue Stopping Him from Playing PGA Tour Events

Phil Mickelson Is Unimpressed With LIV Golf Revamp as Jon Rahm Gives His Stamp of Approval

PGA Tour to Take Disclipinary Action Against Pros Preparing for LIV Golf Qualifying Event – Report

Lexi Thompson Defeats Rose Zhang & 4 Others to Claim Special LPGA Reward: ‘A Huge Honor’

PGA Tour’s exemption web already catches falling stars

He went deeper, outlining how many “safety nets” already exist for players. Win a regular PGA Tour event, and you get a two-year exemption. Win a major or The Players Championship, and you’re safe for five. Even finishing high enough on the career money list can keep a player around for years.

“So many safety nets already exist on the PGA Tour. If you can’t compete, you should be out. That’s just the nature of the game.”

Chamblee’s frustration wasn’t with individual stars, but with structure. If the Tour constantly cushions its veterans, it risks losing the very meritocracy it celebrates.

He then made a sharp distinction between regular events and signature ones. Smaller tournaments benefit from celebrity boosts—having someone like Steph Curry or even Kai Trump play adds buzz and exposure. But the signature events? They already have the stars, the money, and the spotlight.

“If I’m putting up $25 million for a signature event, I already have the biggest names in the game. Why would I need sponsor exemptions there?”

His comparison to the Masters sealed the point. Augusta National doesn’t hand out sponsor exemptions. Every invite there is earned. And that, Chamblee argued, is why it stands apart.

At its heart, Chamblee’s criticism speaks to a growing tension in professional golf. The PGA Tour sells itself as a merit-based competition, yet it increasingly rewards marketable stars with alternate paths. It’s a clash between fairness and fan appeal, between what’s earned and what’s entertained.

Whether the Tour listens remains to be seen. As the 2026 season approaches, one thing is clear—Brandel Chamblee’s challenge has hit a nerve. The next chapter of golf’s merit debate is already teeing up.