Why Infantino is right about a 48-team World Cup in 2026
And what the FIFA can learn from the MLS
Sensational news from the FIFA last week: a dramatic change of course of the World Cup in 2026. The FIFA Council approved a 48-team World Cup in 2026 at a vote in Zurich, which means 16 more countries can take a shot of being the new World Champion. This increase in participating countries also implies a new setup of the competition: the tournament will now start with 16 groups of three teams, with the top two advancing into a 32 team knock-out stage. Quite an innovative move from this traditional conservative association.
80 matches will be played in total with this new approach, whereas the 32-team championship has a total of 64 matches. For reaching the final the same amount of matches need to be played in the same amount of time, which remains at 4 weeks.
More surprises = more entertainment
Although this announcement didn’t came as a major surprise, it did provoke a lot of emotional reactions. The European Club Association (ECA) for example stated that ‘we understand that this decision has been taken based on political reasons rather than sporting ones’. Another often heard argument is that greed is the centre of it all. Financial greed that is of course: more participating nations means more revenue. In fact, the FIFA calculated a $1B extra income with this new model. And also the competitive aspects are mentioned: What’s the point of small football countries being slaughtered in the poule matches?
I strongly believe more teams will cause more entertainment. Not just the usual suspects can make it to the (semi) final, more nations can take a shot at being the best. But obviously there will be more chance of tournament surprises. Teams will take more risk and make split second decisions during the matches, which makes the tournament more exciting en less predictable.
US is the perfect host for the World Cup 2026
The host of the World Cup 2026 is not decided yet, and won’t be until 2020, but the United States are an early favourite to organize the event for the second time in history. Alone or in conjunction with Mexico and Canada, the odds are highly in favor of the sport minded nation.
To refresh the mind, in the pre social media days of 1994, the US organized the World Cup for the first time, despite the host nation’s lack of a national top-level soccer league at that time. Until today they hold the World Cup average attendance record with nearly 69,000 spectators per game. 16.000 more than Brazil’s 2016 edition.
The US spectators showed back then to be enormous football fans, even for a sport which was a lightyear away form the big four (basketball, baseball, american football and icehockey). Since 1996, the start of the Major League Soccer (MLS), football took an enormous flight becoming the fastest growing sport in the US and continuing. So if there would be a nation that want to adopt a new development in soccer, it’s the US. And if indeed extra revenue is the main reason for the FIFA to grow in participating nations, at least the choice for the US as host is inevitable: they’ve invented how to merchandise the sport.
But the relative short love for the beautiful game is not the only reason for a successful landing of the new World Cup in the US, it’s also because they’re already used to a different competition setup.
The MLS differs from the traditional European and South-American leagues as it’s dived into the Eastern and Western Conferences, just like other US leagues. Teams play 34 games in an unbalanced schedule: 24 matches against teams within their conference, plus 10 matches against teams from the other conference. After the regular season the playoffs start in November with the 12 top teams, 6 from each conference, ending with the MLS Cup championship final in early December.
Constant growth of participating teams
But actually not the competitions setup is the biggest differentiator, the constant growth of participating teams is. Since the MLS inception participating teams were growing from 10 teams, to 14 teams in 2008, to 20 teams last year. At the start of upcoming season 22 teams will start and in 24 teams will be playing in the MLS in 2022. So the constant change of the competition is the standard, not the anomaly.
And this just might be the reason why the MLS is the right model in the evolution of the sport. Constantly open for change is necessary to be able to anticipate on global trends and demands. An open view and mind to give every team the opportunity to become the best.
And what about eSports?
The end of this plea for constant change in competitions is maybe a long shot, and not realistic for now. But imagine ‘real’ football competitions following eSports in their competition design. Millions of young players growing up with EA’s FIFA 17, experiencing the possibilities and entertainment that can only be played online. What if the FIFA would organize the World Cup with the same mechanics as FUT Champions, the recent all-new way competition in FIFA 17 on the Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and PC?
FUT Champions is about winning a daily knockout tournament to earn a spot in the Weekend League.Then ‘the clock starts once the weekend begins’. Players have to compete to win as many games as they can from a set number of matches. From Bronze to Elite, everyone who competes in the Weekend League has a chance to earn rewards and move up the monthly leaderboard tiers. For the best of the best, FUT Champions can be a ticket to real world competitions and prizes.
Of course, these daily and weekend tournaments or by no chance suitable for real football teams to execute, but the idea that you have as many possibilities and chances as you wish to reach a final tournament is something to keep in mind for the years to come. After the record breaking Word Cup 2026 in the US.
