RealGM

Fifa have decided that a new system will be installed starting with the 2026 world cup and that it will include 48 teams.
The competition will be played with 16 groups of 3 teams each.



I guess getting rid of Blatter(and many others) has really helped to get Fifa back at concentrating at the game and not just the money.

Anyways, now we can finally witness those matchups like Uganda vs Fiji and other great stuff at the worlds biggest stage.

BTW: Fifa headquaters be like

What a joke.

Not surprising after how successful the expanded Euro 2016 was...

What a farce.

Up next from Infantino: World Cups for US and England

Ted Lasso wrote:Up next from Infantino: World Cups for US and England

Well, the US is actually overdue and should've probably been given the WC in 2022.
Though, my guess would be that they'll get the 2026 WC and will host it together with Canada.

Would also make sense, given that the game is really growing in the States and could help gain even more momentum for the sport in the US.

And England in 2030 or 2034(next time it's being handed to a european country) would also make sense.

Det the Threat wrote:

Ted Lasso wrote:Up next from Infantino: World Cups for US and England

Well, the US is actually overdue and should've probably been given the WC in 2022.
Though, my guess would be that they'll get the 2026 WC and will host it together with Canada.

Would also make sense, given that the game is really growing in the States and could help gain even more momentum for the sport in the US.

And England in 2030 or 2034(next time it's being handed to a european country) would also make sense.

You forgot Mexico. They've already hosted it twice.

No_20 wrote:You forgot Mexico. They've already hosted it twice.

Yeah, that's common knowledge but doesn't really matter.
European countries have hosted it twice as well and there are still others in contention.
I mean, it would actually be a case for another WC in the US(who already made a bid for 2022), given that Mexico hosted it twice(within a short time frame) as well.

The US also makes the most sense on the american continent, given that it's the most stable country of the region and has a league that's growing year after year.
And given that there are loads of possible sponsors, with two of the main WC sponsors(McDonalds, Coca Cola) having their headquaters there, it's a given that this will happen.

Det the Threat wrote:

Ted Lasso wrote:Up next from Infantino: World Cups for US and England

Well, the US is actually overdue and should've probably been given the WC in 2022.
Though, my guess would be that they'll get the 2026 WC and will host it together with Canada.

Would also make sense, given that the game is really growing in the States and could help gain even more momentum for the sport in the US.

And England in 2030 or 2034(next time it's being handed to a european country) would also make sense.

A nation which has already hosted the World Cup and still seriously lacks in terms of public enthusiasm for the sport cannot possibly be overdue to host it in my opinion. They may be a strong contender (especially if they bid with Mexico or Canada) among the group which will eligible to host (for example, Australia, China, Japan, and Korea won't be because of Qatar hosting) but one could make the argument that Argentina for one is just as overdue.

Blatter would still be in power today if he gave 2018 and 2022 to England and America, respectively. He wasn't dethroned because he was corrupt. They got rid of him because he wasn't giving the West what they wanted. Whether you think it makes sense to hand them the tournament or not, acquiescing to such an attitude and grand plan is just another type of corruption.

idk how i feel about it..... I don't want it to be watered down....

similar to the idea of the NFL expanding the season, wouldn't this open more vulnerability to injuries to star players? or suspensions due to card accumulation?

Are there really 16 countries that deserve a chance?

Going to suck for teams losing 2 games... all the money spent for that country only to play 2 games

Groups of 3 teams? That doesnt sound good. Gonna be a waste of time watching group stage games.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

There wasn't the urgency to change the format but it isn't so bad. Yes the group stage will be awful but I like the idea of one more elimination round.

What will they say when a top 10 player or a top 5 star gets hurt against a small irrelevant team?

sh*t, we may not see the stars playing vs the "scrubs" and that's what its going to be.

Det the Threat wrote:The US also makes the most sense on the american continent, given that it's the most stable country of the region

Canada says hi

Its only been 22 years since Usa Hosted.

So why should they get a better chance to repeat that other viable options like England ( 51 years since they hosted) Spain ( 34 years since they hosted)

Or over viable countries that have never hosted one like Portugal or China.

People is overreacting about " losing" quality too.

No, Samoa, Gibraltar or Grenadine are not gonna qualify.

If they do it right and give a good rise on spots to Europe and specially SOUTH america quality would actually go up a bit, since there are always 3 south america snubbed teams that are competitive and like 8 european ones.


btw, groups will be 3 teams groups, 2 games only ONE TEAM qualifies , you screw up first game you are out, feel good stories and underdog stories will go up in numbers.

Also a team that reaches the final plays the exact same number of games
before it was 3 +1+1+1+1 Now is 2+1+1+1+1+1

No, you are wrong. It isn't only the first to qualify but the first two,
Group stage = one elimination for each group.

Raps in 4 wrote:

Det the Threat wrote:The US also makes the most sense on the american continent, given that it's the most stable country of the region

Canada says hi

As far as I know, it would be a Co-host WC with the USA + Canada being the host.
And that would make sense, given that the MLS also has teams in Canada, with every other major sport(besides the NFL) having teams up north as well.

Also, given the new format, you'll need more stadiums to host all those games, which would make including Canada even more likely.

Hellcrooner wrote:Its only been 22 years since Usa Hosted.

So why should they get a better chance to repeat that other viable options like England ( 51 years since they hosted) Spain ( 34 years since they hosted)

Or over viable countries that have never hosted one like Portugal or China.

That's pretty easy.
First of all, it would be 32 years(1994 - 2026) after hosting the WC the last time.
Second of all, Fifa hands those world cups to different regions and has a system that won't allow another UEFA based country to host the WC just eight years after Russia does.

England, Spain or Portugal(who hosted the EC 2004) won't be eligable until 2030, the earliest.

China won't be an option as Quatar will host it in 2022 and they're part of the Asian Football Confederation. So they'll have to wait at least till 2038 or even later.

BTW: Australia would be interesting and could host with New Zealand, but they've joined Asia(in order for a shot at directly qualifying) and probably wouldn't get a chance as well.

Hellcrooner wrote:Its only been 22 years since Usa Hosted.

So why should they get a better chance to repeat that other viable options like England ( 51 years since they hosted) Spain ( 34 years since they hosted)

Or over viable countries that have never hosted one like Portugal or China.

People is overreacting about " losing" quality too.

No, Samoa, Gibraltar or Grenadine are not gonna qualify.

If they do it right and give a good rise on spots to Europe and specially SOUTH america quality would actually go up a bit, since there are always 3 south america snubbed teams that are competitive and like 8 european ones.


btw, groups will be 3 teams groups, 2 games only ONE TEAM qualifies , you screw up first game you are out, feel good stories and underdog stories will go up in numbers.

Also a team that reaches the final plays the exact same number of games
before it was 3 +1+1+1+1 Now is 2+1+1+1+1+1

Top 2 qualify.

48 teams, 16 groups >> 32 teams, knockout.

Well the rotation of confederations is actually quite stupid to be honest

I mean

In one of the conferences there are only THREE viable options
Usa ( already had one and not so long ago really)
Mexico, already has hosted it twice
And Canada.

In other conference there are only two countries that can really host it

Argentina , already had one.
Brazil, Has had it Twice , last one just too recently.

Africa.............1 country, it already has had it, too recently.

Oceanía............0 ( since aussies play in the asian confed)


Asia:

Japan , already had it and not long ago
Korea already had it and not long ago

China GOOD.
Australia.

Yep, definetly from ALL the " non europe" world i think the three Next Countries shoudl be those, China, Australia and Canada.

And i also think the rotation should be

1 time europe
1 time rest of the world
1 time europe
1 time rest of the world.


First in line in europe should be Portugal and a joint Bid Belgium+Netherland.

Portugal/Spain could hold a joint one too

The increased number of teams will surely be skewed to Europe, South America and maybe Africa, and deservedly so.