We are one year away from the FIFA World Cup 2026, held, for the first time in three countries: USA, Canada and Mexico. Also, the first edition with… 48 teams. Almost a quarter of the countries from all the world. A disgrace. Why am I saying that? Because while following to globalize and to offer chances to everybody as much as possible, the quality of the game itself is fading more and more. And the prospects are even worse, because it is proposed for 2030, when a century of World Cup will be celebrated, to admit… 64 teams! That would be a complete detractor. And I will explain why.

From 13 teams to 48 at the World Cup! For now…

First real interesting thing to highlight about 2026, is that Mexico will become the first ever country to host World Cup matches in three editions, after 1970 and 1986. Truth being told, in 1986, Colombia was the original scheduled host, but an earthquake dragged the hosting to Mexico. That, though, is another story. Let us go back to the 48 teams. Initially, the World Cup, from 1930 – first edition held in tiny Uruguay – had 13 teams, and got consecrated with 16 teams. Until 1982, first edition with 24 teams. These versions were quite digestible,  and rather competitive, but since 1998, when the 32-version edition emerged.

4 times more teams than we had in the ’80s!

Starting 1998, nations like Jamaica, Trinidad & Tobago, Togo, Angola, Bosnia & Herzegovina, or Qatar became more like colored cultural spots, not true competitors. OK, sports is about diversification, inclusion, and so on, but it needs to be first about value, art, and quality. And there was no quality in seeing a Sweden – Trinidad & Tobago 0-0, or Togo playing some “estimate” football. Indeed, extending the number of countries we did have access to some beautiful stories, like Senegal, Japan, Ghana, Ecuador, or even Iceland, to some extent, but in general the feeling is that including, you actually delude the essence. Moving from 16 teams to potentially 64, in an era when football is not the same as it used to be in terms of passion and involvement, can’t bring something good.

The Rugby World Cup should become a true model

Before continuing my analysis, let’s take the rugby World Cup. Some extensions happened there as well, but in general things look different. For some time, the tournament had only 20 nations, and that made perfect sense. From 2027 onward, it will have 24. It isn’t great news, but at least in this world we know the contenders: France, England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Italy, New Zeeland, Australia, Fiji, Tonga, South Africa, Namibia, Georgia, Argentina, Uruguay, and some of Samoa, Romania, Portugal, Spain, Canada, USA etc. The selection is narrow and it is kept like that, to facilitate quality, not quantity.

The Centenary World Cup doesn’t need to involve quantity

Now, from 24 to 48 is a huge difference, let alone adding that to 64. Making a history leap, let’s imagine how could a 2030 centenary World Cup might look like with 64 teams. A plan that I am almost sure it won’t pass this time, but being put on paper, it is eligible to move forward at any time, and true sports lovers don’t want such thing to happen, trust me. Then, let’s have a shot in the football world five years from now, putting the milestone in Montevideo, Uruguay, where everything started in the summer of 1930.

Six host nations at the World Cup 2030

If in 2026 there will be three hosts, for the first time, in 2030 we will have… six! Of  course all of them will be qualified directly. The main course will be a combination among Spain, Portugal and Morocco, which looks indeed interesting, as the first intercontinental World Cup ever hosted, but also the Uruguay – Paraguay – Argentina triple will start the festive tournament. If the first of them make perfect sense to organize something, and of course Argentina is the flavor of the day, and will be then as well, with Messi still playing, and still being pushed from behind to score maybe his 250th national team goal, while CR7, at 45, will hit 300, the presence of Paraguay is the most exotic of them all, by far. Even if Paraguay did wrote some interesting football stories in their World Cup participations.

Where are we now?

And then, if you have six hosts, why won’t you go with 64 participants?! What we do know is that in 2026 we will have the first World Cup with 48 teams, and this is the most likely outcome for 2030, as of now. How those are split, though, by confederation? Because, in the end, this is the most sensitive topic.

1. UEFA (Europe): 16 slots (out of 54) –> 30% of total will qualify to occupy 33% of the slots!
2. CONCACAF (North & Central America): 6 slots (out of 35, but here we include the host nations) –> 17% of total will qualify and occupy 12.5% of the slots.
3. CONMEBOL (South America): 6 slots (out of 10) –> 60% to qualify for 12.5% of the slots
4. CAF (Africa): 9 slots (out of 53) –> 17% of total will qualify for 19% of the slots
5. AFC (Asia): 8 slots (out of 46) –> 17% of total will qualify for 17% of the slots
6. OFC (Oceania): 1 slot (out of 11) –> 9% of total to qualify for 2% of the slots

Ceferin likes EURO with 24 teams, but doesn’t want a World Cup with 64. LOL

Having the presentation above, and gathering, we see 46 slots. Two more slots will come thru play-offs, and apart UEFA, all continents have at least one chance to get another nation to the 2026 World Cup. At a first sight, the proportionality is more than reasonable, but when you see the game itself, and the general behavior, you can conclude it is a disaster. But the FIFA president, Gianni Infantino looks in favor to this kind of expansion for 2030, to… 64 teams! The UEFA president, Aleksandar Ceferin, doesn’t adhere to the idea for now, but I can bet things will get settled and after an alleged “successful” campaign in 2026, with maybe another Messi World Cup, as it must happen,  the conclusion will be that football is for everybody, that inclusion is the most important so that all this will help develop football more and more.

World Cup 2030 could have 22 teams from Europe!

I am not sure what development really mean to this people, but for sure football doesn’t look more developed everywhere, as they claim. And it should not be developed by force! Let’s take some solid examples: China and India. In spite being the biggest countries in the world, in terms of population, their football capabilities are very limited, even though China did qualify for the 2002 World Cup and has a pretty strong championship. And that should be OK! It is not written everywhere, that football should be at top level in all countries from Earth. Actually, trying to expand these competitions beyond logic limits, this sport is being diluted, not developed! Let’s make the exercise of a World Cup in 2030, with 64 teams! What does this mean, from a proportion stand point? A multiplication of the World Cup 2026 teams by 1.33 (33% increase of number of teams)! From where? Let’s see:

1. Europe: 22 (2 hosts)
2. North America: 8
3. South America: 10 (3 hosts) – all nations!
4. Africa: 12 (1 host)
5. Asia: 10
6. Oceania: 2

Where do we get 10 from Asia or eight from North America?!

It might be a stretch, but in general lines, this would be the shape. I am surprised Ceferin is yet reluctant, as there are already 24 European teams competing in the continental competition. Including the likes of Albania, North Macedonia or Finland, nations which would have never qualified for a 16 teams tournament, of course… It will be like that at the World Cup, but much worse. Because, for example, you don’t have 12 teams in Africa worthy of a World Cup, neither do you have… 10 (!!!) in Asia. From where…? Apart from Japan, South Korea, Iran and… Australia, I can’t think of any decent participation at an international tournament of such magnitude. In South America all will qualify, it will be no competition at all, so the bar will go really down. While in North America, you might have some competing between US, Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica and maybe Panama / Honduras. But these are six altogether. The value will nosedive…

An example of a more spectacular World Cup. With 32 teams

Don’t get me wrong, I loved always to watch underdogs, as I was speaking about Iceland or Senegal, but underdogs are worthy of their name when they make their way up, not the other way around. If you get a generation who qualifies fair, it can attract the football development by itself. Not expanding the tournament at a number of nations almost at 30% of the total nations on earth. If you don’t fight for the growth, that cannot ever happen. It is just common sense. But is there any alternative? Of course. Like with the less and less popular idea of creating a Super League in the European football, even though a brilliant one, and I’ve commented here why, a World Cup can produce much more by assigning, like in rugby, a certain places to some specific nations. Which will these be? Well…

1. Europe:
   1. Direct (10 slots): Germany, Spain, Italy, France, England, Portugal, The Netherlands, Croatia, Belgium, Poland.
   2. Play-off 1 (3 slots): Switzerland, Denmark, Austria, Sweden, Poland, Turkey.
   3. Play-off 2 (2 slots): rest of Europe.
2. South America:
   1. Direct (3 slots): Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay.
   2. Play-off (2 slots): rest of teams.
3. Africa:
   1. Direct (2 slots): Morocco, Senegal.
   2. Play-off (2 slots): rest of teams.
4. Asia:
   1. Direct (2 slots): Japan, South Korea.
   2. Play-off (2 slots): rest of teams.
5. North & Central America:
   1. Direct (2 slots): USA, Mexico.
   2. Play-off (2 slots): rest of teams –> one should play a knock out against Oceania representative.

Things can change, but not by much

The above exemplification aligns exactly 32 teams, and it fits perfectly to all the patterns. Wow! 15 for Europe?! What about the host nation? Everything will become simpler here, because basically, having a certain number of teams direct (19 in this scenario), so it is reasonable to chose a host / two hosts, among these. Should the names be written in stone? Not necessary. I have made up this scenario analyzing the current FIFA ranking, and having a glance on the overall World Cup legacy. It looks a bit cruel, but it shouldn’t be. The teams can be announced before each edition, with a reasonable amount of time ahead (before the preliminary starts). Because in Europe it can happen that some names, like Poland, Denmark, or even Czech Republic to have a better shot in a same moment in the history. Let’s not forget what results had in the past Sweden, Hungary, Greece, or even Romania, Bulgaria, or Iceland. It should be an opportunity to change, but not by much.

Let’s be honest… what do people really want to see?

Of course, in Asia we can have Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Australia replacing Japan and South Korea, but I don’t see anybody being able to challenge the three greats in South American history. We might have Canada in Mexico or USA shoes, but I hardly see any other contender. Things should be simple. Africa is a bit different, but currently Senegal and Morocco do look to produce best football. And no, I don’t consider Africa to be worthy of more than four nations at a World Cup. They had some good stories, but not that great to justify a broader participation. The essence is to gather the best, so this is the way in which the smaller can strive and progress. I bet you always heard about people who want to see a clash between Germany and Argentina, or between Brazil and Spain. But have you heard somebody excited to see Togo – Uzbekistan. Common, let’s be honest.

Hope to see a 32 teams edition in 2030

Locally, you might want to see a Greece – Ecuador, or a game between Romania – Uzbekistan, no doubts about that. But I am sure that in USA, China, India, or Australia nobody cares about these games. But many from these huge markets might want to see France – Uruguay, or Portugal – The Netherlands. It is just common sense! Having all these said and explained, I am pretty confident that a World Cup with 48 teams will not produce the expected results, on the contrary. But having 64 teams I can proclaim the fall of football as we know it. When entertainment and “inclusion” prevail, then quality fades away. And we might be forced to see games between Italy and Papua New Guinee, when the Europeans will be forbidden, by “law” to score more than two goals / half. It is just an example of what we can have if we insist in forcing an imaginary development.