THE next World Cup could be the worst competition FIFA has ever organised. Those who believe that shiny and big means beautiful will see 2026 as the opportunity for grandiose statements from the US and its symbolic co-hosts, but the World Cup, in moving into the final bloated phase of excess, has abandoned any claim to be a competition for elite football. The golden goose may not have been killed yet, but it could be on the critical list.
People keep talking about too many games, but there is a quick way to ease the burden on the players’ shoulders; reduce the World Cup and European Championship qualifiers, reduce the size of the Champions League and eliminate the Nations Leagues. Consolidate the federations and FIFA and use the different competitions in a coordinated way. There are 48 participants in the 2026 World Cup, far too many for a quality tournament. The more people participate, the more the standard becomes diluted. It doesn’t take a data analysis unit in a dark room to work that out.
Take England’s recent history in World Cup qualifiers; in the last five they have played 48 matches, winning 39 and losing only once. The groups were incredibly weak, with the 2026 group averaging 101st place in the elo ratings. In the 2022 qualifiers it was 105. No wonder England, who played Latvia, Serbia, Andorra and Albania with ease and rarely particularly well, disposed of them. The matches were often tedious, but England got credit for staying focused and doing their job. But it does make you wonder if it’s all worth it.
UEFA/FIFA could reduce their stakes if they introduced a simple play-off format to remove the very weak footballing nations from the equation. The Nations League could be used to determine who qualifies for the European Championship and the European Championship could become a passport to the World Cup. The result would mean fewer matches on the international calendar and fresher players when the World Cup and European Championship finals actually take place. The same benefits would apply to CONMEBOL, CONCACAF, CAF and AFC. This all depends on cooperation between the FIFA federations and FIFA itself, something that may be trickier than it seems on paper. Another problem is FIFA’s desire to continue with the Club World Cup, effectively placing the burden of competition on a similar group of players. Whatever was said about the 2025 pilot, the football wasn’t brilliant and the presentation was terrible, not to mention the weather.
Of course, the continued expansion of leagues isn’t helping and there will certainly come a time when audiences tire of summer tournaments that seem to last forever. As well as the TV fatigue, there is also an underlying feeling that FIFA is simply tempted by the opportunity to squeeze even more money out of the punter and is looking for like-minded partners. In the US they may have discovered just that, but the current political climate suggests that 2026 could be far from smooth and there could be a few surprises in store for FIFA and those who decide to risk a summer of potential disruption. Donald Trump has already said he will move matches in US cities if there is a hint of trouble, in which case FIFA would have lost control of the situation.
We all have our opinions about governing bodies, but it is important that FIFA (and UEFA) give the impression that they know what they are doing and that the health of football is at the heart of their agenda. The prospect of a European Super League has not gone away and by teaming up with the wrong people – those who value financial gain and personal profile over the integrity of the sport – they could endanger the game. The 2026 World Cup will be interesting to watch, but not necessarily on the field of play.
Published by
Game of the People was founded in 2012 and is ranked among the 100 best football websites by various sources. The site consistently wins awards for its work, across a wide range of topics. View all posts by Neil Fredrik Jensen
#World #Cup #Sixteen #twentyfour #thirtytwo #Bingo