Whether Brooks and Bryson Like Each Other Means Squat for the USA's Ryder Cup Chances

History is filled with champions — and movie stars — who couldn't stand each other and it didn't make a bit of difference, writes Morning Read's Dan O'Neill.

Well, it’s official, “Bennifer” is an item again.

Oops, sorry, wrong celebrity couple.

But make no mistake, we’re still talking melodrama, still in a soap opera. The one we meant to bring up is “DeChamBrooks,” i.e. the hostile relationship between burly and surly, the beef between Bryson DeChambeau and Brooks Koepka.

The two PGA Tour titans will be among the few, the proud, the dozen who represent the Yanks at the once-removed 2020 Ryder Cup matches. The exhibition between Team USA and Team Europe will take place Sept. 24-26 at Whistling Straits in Kohler, Wisc. The complete rosters will be solidified in the next few days, but the aforementioned already punched their tickets through the points standings.

What some wonder is if they might punch each other, or if the unfriendliness the two have fired up for cameras and social media posts will spill into a Cup-seeking clubhouse. Is it possible tour patriots could turn into the Red, White and Bickering?

U.S. captain Steve Stricker told Morning Read he already has addressed the potential Family Feud, talking to both combatants about making nice. "They said it’s not going to be an issue,” Stricker said, “and I believe them. I trust them.”

Frankly, there’s no reason to expect it would be an issue. Historically speaking, not every victorious team or association has been constructed through mutual admiration societies. There hasn’t always been a $40 million Player Impact Program to encourage a brand-building, attention-grabbing quarrel — as there is on the PGA Tour. But there have been numerous examples of adversarial relationships on winning teams.

The New York Yankees won 107 games and a World Series in 1932 with two stars in the middle of the lineup — Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig — that weren’t talking to each other. In fact, the “Murderer’s Row” members didn’t make up until 1939, when Ruth hugged the terminally ill Gehrig after his memorable speech on “Lou Gehrig Appreciation Day.”

Through the years, a number of successful teammates have had similarly sour relationships — Shaquille O’Neal and Kobe Bryant, Barry Bonds and Jeff Kent, Donovan McNabb and Terrell Owens. Heard of Tinker to Evers to Chance — the famous double play combo that helped win world championships for the Chicago Cubs in 1907 and 1908? Two of its members — Joe Tinker and Johnny Evers — didn’t speak to each other for 20 years.

You can carry the narrative to the entertainment industry, as well. Tony Curtis reportedly said kissing former girlfriend Marilyn Monroe on the set of "Some Like It Hot" was “like kissing Hitler.” Rolling Stones headliners Mick Jagger and Keith Richards have had their share of friction. Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel often have bridged troubled waters in their partnership.

Moreover, it’s safe to say previous Ryder Cup or President’s Cup teams have not been unilaterally populated by best friends. Perhaps Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson could elaborate.

Would it serve Stricker well to pair Koepka and DeChambeau together in matches? Perhaps not. That approach fell flat in 2004, when U.S. captain Hal Sutton employed the surprise tandem of Woods-Mickelson in morning fourball and afternoon foursomes. The odd couple went 0-2 and became a postcard for Europe’s 18 ½ to 9 ½ rout.

That result suggests it might be best to follow the science, to avoid using the Whistling Straits as an opportunity for relationship building. There’s no reason to force the issue, unless the skill sets encourage it.

But to suggest DeChambeau and Koepka can’t be on the same property, can’t push aside their differences — manufactured or otherwise — for a common good is just silly. Think about your own experiences. Surely, you have played on recreational teams, or contributed to group projects, in situations where you were not enamored with each individual involved.

Did it impact your efforts, your ability to function, your desire for the group to succeed? Did it doom the entire operation to failure?

Perhaps in some cases it does, but this is golf. You show up at a muny to spend 4½ hours with people you’ve never met, people you know nothing about, people you might not particularly embrace … and you play.

DeChambeau and Koepka will have to be in the same hotel together, they won’t have to share a room. They will attend the same gatherings, they won’t have to sit together. They will be on the same golf course, they won’t be in the same cart.

To suggest Team USA’s temperament is so delicate, that its chances for success could be compromised because two of its 12 members aren’t best buds seems pretentious. The theory makes some disparaging assumptions about the depth of character of those two men.

It suggests that personal agendas and egos play prominent roles in the U.S. team composition. And if that is the case, that’s sad. Otherwise, it indicates people assign a distorted amount of importance on the imprecise and erroneous component of “chemistry.”

Truth is, if you ask Mickelson and Woods about what went wrong in 2004, they will talk about a lack of preparation time, about the conflicting characteristics of their golf balls. Truth is, other pairings featuring Woods and Mickelson have disappointed, as well. Mickelson has the most losses (22) in Ryder Cup history, followed closely by Woods (21).

And truth is, as Hall of Fame closer Bruce Sutter once said, “The other team has scholarship players, too.”

Team USA won the last domestic Ryder Cup competition at Hazeltine in 2016. But it has failed to secure the Cup in 11 of the last 16 meetings. Analysts of that record often cite chemistry as a problematic factor. But if you believe Team USA’s Ryder Cup aspirations are tied to how Brooks Koepka and Bryson DeChambeau get along, you have some chemical concerns of your own.

After all, Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez were spotted shopping together just the other day. Bet they didn’t go home empty-handed.