The NEW 2026 World Cup Format EXPLAINED!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ค. 2024
- The 2026 World Cup that will be hosted by the United States, Mexico and Canada has expanded to 48 nations and will have a new and revised format, let us explain it to you.
Time Stamps:
0:00 The 2026 World Cup Format and Qualifiers
0:52 World Cup format changes throughout history all the way till 2026
3:46 How many spots does each confederation get for the 2026 World Cup?
5:55 The old format of the 2026 World Cup.
9:05 The new format of the 2026 World Cup
Tactical Yanks Podcast: link.chtbl.com/tacticalyanks
Tactical Manager Clips:
/ @tacticalmanagervlogs
TMTV STORE:
www.tacticalmanagertv.com/
Follow on Instagram:
@Tacticalmanagertv
Follow on Twitter
@ManagerTactical
FuboTV Link for Free Trial:
www.fubo.tv/welcome?irad=3437...
Our Live Streaming Studio Browser platform preference:
streamyard.com?fpr=tactical10
Music By Skymike Subscribe to his Channel :
/ @skymike
Music by Lofi Breno - Smacks - thmatc.co/?l=E4595E28
Music by Samuel A - Flight - thmatc.co/?l=04B4045F
Sources:
www.transfermarkt.com
www.mlssoccer.com/
www.espn.com/
www.sofascore.com/
#WorldCup #TacticalManagerTV - กีฬา
The revised format that I go through has been confirmed by FIFA, just now!!!!
Right on time.
Hey Tac, can you provide a link for the change? I haven't found anything on the FIFA website.
bullshit this is not the real format, 12 groups with 4 teams in each.
Now we can add "inside information" to the reasons to follow Tactical Manager!
Bullshit having teams getting through as 3rd by beeing compared with teams who had complety different opponents and constellations within the group. Group A has a clear disadavantage compared to Group L. Just unfair.
Why am I the only one seeing that.
?
@@superman-rz3vw That's far fairer than having a 3-team group, my friend! Just check what happened to Algeria in 1982.
I'm old enough to remember World Cup '94. The 12 teams of 4 feels like a reversion to the 6 groups of 4 of those days and the look at the third place tables wondering who might qualify as best 3rd placed.
I remembered loving the expansion to 32 teams. The final group match drama is something that won't be as well replicated in the 48 team format unless the World Cup gets expanded again to 64. The moving of some of the drama to the third place table is going to take away some of that final group matches excitement.
That said, I think the 12 groups of four is a much better format than 16 groups of three and I hope that is the final decided format in the 48 team edition.
catenaccio dignified..
I hope for the first round of knockouts they do pot draws like the Champion's League. Like the first pot is the top 8 and they draw against a pot of the 8 third place teams. Then 9-12 group winners draw against 21-24 lower ranked 2nd place teams and 13-20 second place teams draw against each other within the same pot. So each team that qualifies for the round of 32 will be ranked 1-32 based on points, goal difference, goals scored, goals conceded, fair play, and then finally FIFA rankings if necessary. That way there is incentive to perform well in the group stage and promote inter-group competition. So teams will not just be competing within their group, but also fight for ranking with teams in other groups. And they should be distributed evenly on both sides of the knockout table based on the performance in the tournament so you dont't get 6 top 8 teams on one side of the table and only 2 top 8 teams on the other side.
Why wouldn't final group match reolicate in 48 team format . I mean i am very confused here byt they go with 12 group with 4 ream wouldn't it be same like 2022 ? Same thrill ?
@@natoslayer2907 it will make easy to score goals for top team,
And to become world cup top goal scores is easy which till 2006 is so hard,
12 groups of 4. Take top two teams from each group for a knockout round of 24 teams, whereas 8 teams with the best points get a one game bye while the remaining 16 play each other, and the winners play the previously idle 8 teams. That way to qualify for the knockout round, a team is only compared to its own group. The teams getting the byes would be compared to other groups, but hey, it ain't gonna be perfect.
I like that idea better than 8 third place teams
this is exactly what I was thinking, 8 teams get a "bye"
I still think this is better, as it gives more chances
It also gives incentive to come out on top
Isn't it 32 in the knockout?
New Zealand will make the 2026 world cup. Honestly what a time to be alive
My format suggestion: Keep the 12 groups of 4, and the 8 best 3rd-place teams. However, have the third place teams decided based on how close they are to 2nd place in their respective group.
For example, say that team 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are all in different groups.
Say that all these teams placed third in their group. teams 1-8 are 2 points away from 2nd place, but teams 9-12 are 4 points away from 2nd place. That means teams 1-8 qualify for the knockout stage.
Tiebreakers (such as goal difference) work the same way as regular group stage tiebreakers, but the value is determined by the goal difference compared to second place.
For example, say that 2 teams (team A and B) are in third place of different groups. team 1 is second place in team A's group, and team 2 is second place in team B's group.
Here is a visualization:
Group X
1. Random Team
2. Team 1 (5 points) (Goal Difference: +2)
3. Team A (3 points) (Goal Difference: 0)
4. Random Team
Group Y
1. Random Team
2. Team 2 (3 points) (Goal Difference: +1)
3. Team B (1 point) (Goal Difference: 0)
4. Random Team
Even though teams A and B have the same goal difference, team B has a closer goal difference to 2nd place of their group. Therefore, team B would advance.
After the group stage, it would go into the round of 32 knockout stage.
hey I always will remember Austria and Germany getting the score that got them both through at the expense of Algeria and Chile in Spain '82... and seeing fans waving money implying a fix ... and seeing that after about eleven minutes neither team really seemed to be trying to score another goal
Letting 8 3rd placed teams based on comoarions throughout completely differant opponents and groups is not much better
Can u explain how it happened at the expense of Algeria? What needed to happen for Algeria to make it thru?
@@sepulvjl Germany and Austria knew exactly what result was needed to ensure them both to advance. Germany scored an early 1-0 against Austria.
Afterwards both teams just Stopped playing, just passed the Ball around.
@@sepulvjl algeria had already played their Last match
@@sepulvjl And Austria dropped from top of the group to second, and didn't make it to the finals. West Germany made it to the finals, losing to Italy.
I much prefer this format to the one originally proposed back in 2018. Groups of 3 teams aren’t as exciting
@@franciscobuenrostro3891 and gives room for game-fixing
I like third place groups moving forward because there’s actually something to fight for if you have lost your first two games
The pictures used were perfect for each topic 👍
Great video dude! Fantastic explanations
I would suggest the concept of having each confederation's tournament winners automatically qualify. This way it allows more nations the chance of entry.
i think the reason they don’t do this let’s say a undogs wins it and they embarrass themselves an the actual tournament that’s why they don’t do it mostly likely
I like 12 groups of 4. On June 25, 1982 in Spain, Germany and Austria stroked each other the entire 2nd half of their final group match after Germany went up 1-0 in the opening half, putting both teams through to the elimination round, screwing over Algeria. It was a shameful World Cup moment. Since then, Game 3 group games have been played simultaneously.
12 groups of four all day long. I means no team is mathematically out after two games. which means theres plenty to play for even if you lose your first two games. I remember this format from the 86, 90 and 94 world cups and missed it when they moved to the 32 game format.
the good thing about the bottom spots being "play in" spots is that even if they're not great, at least they'll have some momentum
With groups of 3, you need to add another knock out round. Group winners advance directly to the round of 32, while 2nd place teams play 3rd place from another group for the other 16 spots.
Advantages:
1) Gives real stakes to winning your group (get a rest week instead of an elimination game) so final round match fixing becomes less likely
2) every team still gets 3 games minimum
3) every team is on the field when they are eliminated. You have to lose to get knocked out.
4) Group winners play the same number of games that they did in 2022, just replacing one group game with a knockout game.
5) Unlike the new format, there's no semi meaningless cross group comparisons that are largely decided by running up the score on bad teams
Fair. Why haven’t I seen such idea brought up?
@@huykim4663 because most people are terrible at figuring out tournament formats?
I've been organizing tournament structures for a national sporting organization (USA Ultimate) for the last 22 years so I have a lot of experience with tournaments of roughly this length.
Because the knockout is against another group you still have an incentive to get to 2nd place and you have an earlier comparison with another group. But goals scored in a 2nd vs. 3rd place should not fall into the statistics or else the golden boot, might be easier to win if you are not first place! On the other hand, it's also more likely to get a match ban because of the extra cards you receive... That would mean that it is easier than ever to get into the knockouts, it means a total of 3 matches for a group and an extra Group-knockout-match. This would mean 16 groups x 3 Matches + 16 Group-Knockout-matches = 64 Matches compared to the 72 matches if there are 6 matches in 12 groups. And would it bring closer to 48 Matches as it was in previous worldcups.
I think this version could be interesting!
I was going for a crazy big tournament:
"If you make 8 groups out of 48, you would have 6 in each group! You let the first 4 teams go through for the last 32.
To get the best possible last of 16, you could pair a first place with a fourth place and a second place with a third place for the last 32!
So you would have to play 5 matches in the Group stage, and 5 in the knockout stages, making it a total of 10 Matches for a title. There would also be 3 matches simultaneously played at the end of the group matches, making it even more dramatic.
This of course increases the risk of injury, so you would need a bigger squat and more substitutes. Another way to ensure physical fitness would be to reduce the playtime for the group stages to two halves of 30 minutes and increase it for the knock-out stages, which obviously will have backlash, but it could be fun and interesting, and older or weaker players could perform better in the group stages! This would mean instead of 270mins played in 3 Matches you would have 300mins played in 5 Matches.
You could also have 2 matches simultaneously from the beginning and 3 at the end of the group stage, this way you could have 6 matches a night. That would mean you have 3 days' rest in between matches. And you have 120 matches played in 20 nights and the last 32 matches in 20-21 nights (4-5 rest days). So a total length of 40-41 nights!"
Thank you very much, I finally understand the format of ms 2026, now I realize that it will be a great 48 teams, I can hope that whether it will be my country Slovakia or our brother country Czech Republic, besides I will watch night after night
I hope too cuz i want our country czech to play in something major lol
@@doglix3259 the Czech Republic always qualifies for the Euro but not the World Cup
Yay very great letting teams through who finished 3rd:
- group stage would be boring just as the Euros
- how stupid is it to compare teams who had complety different opponents and constellations within in their groups?!
- Teams in Group L have a CLEAR Advantage compared to teams in group A, knowing exactly what result is needed to Top the teams who already played their 3rd match
- how stupid is that? You just shift the Problem you had with 16×3 within the groups to the same Problems you have to 12×4 by comparing groups
Just bullshit, got it?
Thanks great video
I really hate that teams can essentially coast to the knockout stages with 3 points. The final group games are always my favorite part of the tournament. Allowing 3rd place teams to qualify really takes the air out of the final group games
If they are gonna rename the stadium for the games they should name it "New Jersey New York" stadium. New Jersy is it's own state and the stadium is in N.J.!!!
It should just be nj tbh. That’s confusing
I can give a real example of match fixing in the World Cup. Germany-Austria screwed Algeria in 1982.
I was going to say the same thing about West Germany and Austria from 1982. I watched the same day one hour condensed version with Toby Charles as the commentator. He captured the moment perfectly in regards to how shambolic it was.
This will be a fire WC and the first I can actually attend
This will be the best world cup with the new format set to expand!
No lol
@@captainfalconmain6576 yes lol
@@luckymark571no
@@luckymark571that is way to many games 3rd place teams making it don’t feel it used to be like that was 24 teams not 48 tho
@Captainfalconmain65 Who cares? It will allow lower level teams to participate that will likely never do it again in history again this change is just for this cycle if you don't like it then don't watch it 🤷♂️
Honestly the 8 3rd place teams qualifying is fine with me whether it’s a easy group or not because it gives underdogs a chance to shine
Like portugal winning euro cup in 2016,
"your country will not be in the world cup" not my born country and blood country being the host of the world cup
Seed the teams and the group winners of the groups featuring the top 8 teams advance to the round of 16 directly. The remaining four group winners and the second place teams play in the round of 32 with the winners advancing to play the already placed teams. No 3rd place teams will advance and the likely winner of the World Cup - assuming they are a top 8 ranked team and win their group would only have to play 7 games to win.
If there were only four remaining winners plus the runners up, there would only be sixteen teams in the round of 32. im guessing what you mean is that the reamining sixteen would play knockouts and then the winners will play against the seeded top 8, which I like haha
My country the USA is the host nation so it automatically qualified. I liked it anyway because you do a good job breaking down soccer issues.
Not only that. USA, together with Canada and Mexico will be in pot 1, so they will avoid Brazil, Argentina, Germany, England, Spain, etc.
Someone probably said this but:
12 groups of 4, top 2 qualify, random draw for 6 groups of 4, of which the top 2 (12 teams) and top 4 third place teams (16 teams total) go into a 16 team knockout. So a second group stage
I did a fantasy world cup and this is what i mostly did in the continental qualifiers lol. Although in real life, I feel like it is such a hassle if there are two group stages for a tournament. This will also bring the total number of matches to be played by the final two teams into 10 which is too tiring for the players. But hey, no format is perfect.
I'd say for the second group stage, just to reduce the number of games make it so you have to win your group automatically to make the quarterfinals, so winners and top 2 runners up, especially as there's no point of a group stage to just eliminate 8/24 teams. 9 games for the winners and a total of 116 games.
Knockout round from start to finish :) Sounds crazy, but I would love if they tried it - makes every game worthwhile :)
Lets see if CL format will work well than world cup format can be considered similarly:
-24 teams of 2 groups
-Each team will play 5 games in the groups stages which means 4 subgroups of 6 teams inside each main group.
-1st and 2nd goes directly to quarter final (4 teams)
-3rd and 4th teams will paired diagonally and play one extra game to go quarter (2 teams)
-5th-6th-7th-8th will be paired diagonally and play two extra games to go quarter (2 teams)
-Fair pairing is possible in quarters according to achievements in the previous stages
-The champion will play minimum 8 games maximum 10 games.
-More amount of games is an inevitable problem.
I would prefer the 4 team model. Granted the whole 3rd place thing might not be the most fair way of doing things but that is way better than having a bunch of group stage matches between two sides that know for sure they only need a draw to advance.
I would recover the format from Spain'82:
First Round: 12 groups of 4 teams. First 2 advance to Second Round
Second Round: 8 groups of 3 teams: The winner advances to Quarter Finals.
Quarter Finals, Semi Finals and Final.
That Second Round is not a knockout round but it is very similar. I loved back in the day this format and it would be great.
The 8 group format would require 20 days for group stages ( considering 6 games a day plated from 12 noon and every 2 hour interval ) & 16 for knock out with 1 rest day between the two - total 37 days only. Much more revenue with 136 games in all. 🎉
After the group stage of 12 groups with 4 teams, 24 teams qualify for the knockouts which would have 8 1/8 groups with 3 teams. From those 8 group only the winner go to the quarterfinals. We would have 8 games to win the cup, but no third place teams could go through and there is no 1/16 finals at all.
Think this is perfect
I agree with your "FAKE EXAMPLE". It's a great thing to play at the same time not knowing the result of your fellow teams in your group. Just like in 2018 when the Mexicans knew that Germany concedes a goal against South Korea while playing against Sweden in the Group stage. In other words, you need your A+ game at all times just to qualify to the next round.
The World Cups from 1986-94 featured 24 teams in 6 groups of 4.The top two from each group plus the four best 3rd-placed teams from the six groups qualified for the Last 16 knockout stage.
The 2026 tournament will be twice the size of 1986-94, with 12 groups (instead of 6) of four teams plus the eight (compared to 4) best 3rd-placed teams qualifying for the knockout stage. (Last 32, instead of Last 16).
“The Interconfederation playoff” voice over startled me hahah
"Smash the like button otherwise your country will not play in the 2026 World Cup"
Me, a citizen of a country who is hosting the World Cup: 🤔🤔🤔
Personally i prefer it to be 8 groups of 6 which means more equal groups but instead of more than half gets to knockout rounds its exactly half:
2-3 go to a playoff round(cant play the same group and 2nd play 3rd and vice versa)
Then the 1st places join to form Ro16.
This gives the best nations some time to rest but also make for more matches than the current state but less than the intended one
I'm italian and my team didn't play much in the 2024 world cup, so i supported Morocco the whole way through.
If they didnt get to play i would have enjoyed the WC way less.
More nations is good
Your comment makes no sense
Couple points. If you look at the years the expansions occurred they were typically after major world events (mostly global wars or conflicts) on which more countries form formed. WWI and WWII lead to many form countries and many big countries breaking up into smaller pieces (Soviet Union, later Yugoslavia), countless countries in Africa, etc. which in-itself is an organic expansion. This seems to be forced for $$$
8 Groups of 6. Top 3 advance. 1st gets a bye. 2nd plays a 3rd from another group. Winners of that knockout play one of the 1sts in the round of 16. You could play up to 10 games, but most likely the max would be 9 since group winners would be most likely to make the final. More games would be worth it. 1st in group would matter more. Less of a fluky call or red card affecting who makes the knockouts. Every team gets 5 games to showcase their talent and make it worth investing into for the middle ability countries.
8 groups of 6 is the only option that I like of all the possibilities. I would remove the intermediate step though, and have only the top 2 teams in each group pass to the next round, although I don't specially dislike that idea either. 3 teams per group won't make for a very good group stage, and having the "best" thirds advance is terrible imo. It would be ok-ish if there were only 1 or 2 teams advancing this way, but you have 8 out of 12, that's not the "best" thirds, that's the majority of them. The only issues I see with 6 teams per group is that it adds 2 extra games, and that it kind of makes the groups a bit less unpredictable, as it makes it easier for more powerful nations to recover from a bad game.
@@alpuzza I like 8 groups of 6 but the only problem is the number of matches. Its 120 matches just for groups alone.
@@Mattz342 I know, but the alternatives seem even worse to me, and I can see FIFA taking an option with more games (therefore more money) over one with less. Personally I would have preferred the format to stay as it was, 32 teams was perfect (regarding the format, I don't think more teams is bad just because there are more teams). The other only option I see to have a "good" format is to actually increase it to 64 teams instead of 48, which I guess is where we'll be headed in a couple editions.
@@alpuzza but you cant just jump from 32 to 64. This is why you need this 48 team format for maybe the next 3 or 4 world cups.
Here's my format suggestion. Keep it at 16 groups of 3, but each team plays their matches against a different group. Group A vs Group B, Group C vs Group D etc. Each team still plays 3 group matches and the final round of fixtures can still be played simultaneously. (There would than be 3 simultaneous games instead of 2) The top 2 in each group play each other in the R/O 32 etc.
mate thats really strange
If I understand you correctly it can happen that group A wins all its matches against group B with 1-0, so all teams will have 9 points in A and 0 points in B. Goals will be the same, so the number of yellow and red cards or fifa ranking will decide the outcome. Nice try, but no
I'm gonna love this world cup
Omg Guatemala might have a chance for once! Oh please please please :)
How about 8 groups of 6. Top two qualify to the Round of 16. A lot of group games, which is fun. Winner ends up playing 9 games, which is a lot, but worth it. 5 Group games would be exciting, and debut teams get plenty of world cup experience even if they don't win a single game.
Is 48 teams in the WC a good idea? Yes. At the moment, 37% of the world's population almost always misses the WC (India and China have almost always missed the WC historically) with FIFA and the confederations missing out on a significant chunk of revenues that could be poured into the sport from those 2 countries.
To be clear, I'm not advocating that we find more ways to specifically sneak those 2 in. They indeed have to earn their way in, but with 48 teams it increases their chances going forward in time, just like it would increase the chances of other lesser teams in the WC.
My Format:
Groups: 8 groups of 6. Top 4 advance from each advance.
32 teams remain
Swiss Format: Win three games to advance.
16 teams remain
Single Elimination to the winner of the world cup.
I like this format as I think its the most fair for everyone and makes depth more important. The problem is the number of matches.
Match fixing happened in 1982 when West Germany beat Austria 1-0 to help both teams advance at the expense of Algeria. This led to FIFA to change the schedule to have the last 2 games simultaneously .
At this point, might as well expand the world cup again to 64 teams. 16 groups of 4, top 2 advances to round of 32.
Having more teams will make the world cup feels less “exclusive” or “special”, but it will mean more games and more chances for smaller teams to participate in the world cup. And more money to Fifa which they would certainly take.
It would also mean more cross-country bids is necessary since there will be more games to be held
How about 8 groups of 6, with each group split 3 on side A and 3 on side B. Side A teams play side B teams, and 1 team advances per side. That yields 16 teams to straight elimination and a max of 7 games for the finalists. This eliminates any match fixing during round robins and allows each participant country a minimum 3 games. Also, only creme de la creme advance (no 3rd place round robins advancing).
Hosting by 3 countries is a killing of football which is almost dead even without this.
What are you even talking about😂
The only reason FIFA have raised the teams in the World Cup is because
more games = more money from the broadcasting rights
it's always been like that since they went from 16 to 24 in 1982
😭😭😭😭😭
I think it should be like the euro 2024 format but it would be twice the size
I thought of a round of 48 replacing the round of 32 and a round of 24 replacing round of 16 then the round of 12 semi-finals, and finals stage that has 3
The quality of the tournament will go down with 48 teams. But ok, it’s about the money I guess. Why not 8 groups of 6 teams. Then you will have 3 end-matches at the same time. That could be very interesting. If only the best two proceed, you will have 9 matches for the last four.
When there were only 24 teams they also compared between groups for the 3rd place teams. It worked OK.
8 groups of 6. Top two advance. That puts the finalists at 9 games and adds more games for every team throughout the tournament as well. Probably too wacky for some purists but if FIFA likes money this is a way to create more match days.
although this would be fun, the number of game would go from 76 to 135 rather than the 88 proposed meaning the tournament is then too long to be played in a summer break between seasons
maybe italy will actually qualify
"Your country won't play in the World Cup." Honestly, as an American, the only thing that will happen if I don't like this video is we won't get out of our group. But, even if I like it, we might not get out of the group anyway. (I did like it.)
I'm all for expansion. Let's go to 64. I'm just not sure I like the three squad groups.
I prefer groups of 4 over 3 any day, but I would like my proposal more. 8 groups of 6 with only the top 2 going through. This will guarantee the best teams going through and 5 matches for everyone (we waited 4 years for this for crying out loud) with the top 4 playing 9 games (Finals/3rd Place Match). More games = more money which can be great for poorer nations.
I do think that could be an effective format in some ways, such as lack of collusion/fixing (assuming that the final three (of fifteen) matches are played simultaneously). However, the reason that I cannot see that being chosen for a world cup would be the length. That is because you would have 136 matches altogether, and it would be most efficient to have at least three games on a time during group and early knockout stages. But during the semi-finals, you cannot have three matches on, so it would take (in my opinion) about two months to complete. Overall, if it was three matches on at a time during group stage, and five days being required for each group, you would get 40 days of group stages, unless they do six matches, three from two different groups), and then it would take almost three more weeks for the knockout stage. While it would work if the world cup acted as a full-scale season (as opposed to a tournament), it wouldn't work as intended. groups of six could still work for a smaller tournament though.
I’ve been advocating this too, another thing they could have is 1st reach the last 16 and then 2nd play 3rd in an additional knock out game, more teams reach the knockouts and have a chance in the group stage but at the very least 8 groups of 6 seems better
Except they are ruining the format and the game just for money and it’s not like they are gonna donate all the money to the poorer non-host nations.
Not managable in this shortage of time and boring matches with teams who are already out.
@@superman-rz3vw You are absolutely correct. That is obviously another major problem with groups of 6 is that under groups of 4, teams can already be mathematically bound to elimination before their last group match, and groups of 6 could make that problem worse
The latest (revised) format of 12 four-team groups is more or less the same as the one last used in 1994, albeit with double number of teams. Coincidentally 1994 was hosted by USA as well.
I love it
Imagine it was treated like March Madness lol. Single elimination style games leading to the final. Sure it'd be incredibly short but I feel like we could get some huge upsets and tons of drama the whole way.
That wouldn't divide properly since it is 48 teams
I would much rather have 8 groups of 6 teams each. The top 4 teams qualify for the knockout rounds.
its just way too many games.
@@Lonestarr022 Better for the fans. I enjoy world cup soccer much much more than club soccer.
If we stick with the 2 teams per group advancing to the knockout, we could get 24 teams instead with the 24 dividing into 2 bracket which means we have a round of 12 for each bracket. Although there are some teams who'll be skipping some rounds, I think this should goes to the top scoring teams for their hardwork or the least scoring teams to give them a higher chance of having higher place in case they lose.
Under the 8 group of 6 teams each the drama would be very high as 3 games ( all 6 teams from a group ) would be played at the same time so multiple permutations & combinations are possible.
I suggest group 12 in 4 Team best 3rd team should advance with goal different in points of around of 32 and take off last game played in same time of group due to 3rd team advance.
I’d love to see 8 groups of 6. Top 2 go onto the round of 16.
Every team plays at least 5 games instead of only 2 in the projected format. Plus you can still recover from a bad game which is much harder in 3 team groups.
Way too many group stages matches but why not try at least
Liked and subscribed. If the Republic of Ireland don't qualify, I'll be back to have a strongly worded conversation. 😜
You guys can qualfy if you get lucky you guys will mostly like be an pot 3 England Denmark yes Denmark are gonna be an pot 2 😂 so your group is England Denmark Ireland and lative 😂
It would of been nice if they just expanded 8 teams and keep it very similar to the current format but just adding one more team per group for the 8 groups.
40 vs. 48 doesn't really solve anything. Groups of 5 means two more rounds of group play, with one team getting a bye each round in each group. And you actually get the same potential for final round collision that you do in a group of 3, since there is an idle team in the last round.
If you're going to do that, you may as well go to 48 with groups of 6. Still takes 5 rounds of group play (same as groups of 5 with 40 teams) but now all teams in the group can play simultaneously in the last round.
I'm not sure they really want to add another 2 games and ~10 days to the event, but that would actually be a good format.
@@doktarr That is a good point, but it is slightly harder to fix matches in, because two matches are still played simultaneously. It still leaves the door open to a guaranteed elimination for the team not playing in the final round, because the managers will know how many points their team will need at minimum to guarantee elimination for the idle team.
I will lead the boyz to glory this time
8 groups of 6 (round-robin) with top two teams from each group in a round of 16 for knockout stages for up to 9 games required to win.
By having an even number of teams, this eliminates the ability to fix matches on the last day of round-robin and only allows good teams from each group to move on.
The 1982 World Cup was the site for Match Fixing between Wesr Germany and Austria to eliminate Algeria based on goal differential.
I cant wait for the tickets to roll out. I'll be the first one to cop a few
Why is it that Europe has more slots in the FIFA World Cup than any other continent?
Because they are better than any other
1 - Europe has more international teams in it than any other continent (55). Africa (54) Asia (47) North America (41) South America (10).
2 - Out of all these teams European teams are generally rated higher than other continents in the world rankings and are better quality.
3 - Football was invented in Europe and is more supported in Europe than any other continent, Europe also has a better history than any other continent.
4. If there was a club world cup for basketball or baseball you would see more American teams in it than any other nation
Maybe they can organize it with three groups of 16 teams. The top 5 teams from each group would advance, along with the 6th place team with the best record across all three groups combined. After that, it would proceed to the round of 16, and so on.
@@jisungchung2893 one problem is that there would be 360 games in the group stage. It could be a full fledged league in some countries
I hit “like” but I’m pretty sure Canada will be there anyway 🤣
My format:
8 groups of 6, top 2 advances to the knockout stages and when third place is tied, they will have a playoff to win the bronze group stage prize
I think FIFA should consider a play-off round for the 3rd teams
My idea for the group format will be 8 groups of 6 with 1st place qualifying and 2nd/3rd place going to a preliminary round were they play one game against a team that was not in their group and finished in a different position to theirs. And the winners of those matches will qualify for the round of 16 as usual.
I think I'm smart.
So now it looks like 12x4 rather than 16x3 with the top 2 going through and the 8 best 3rd placed teams going into a round of 32 and so on from there....
What I would maybe do is the 12x48 with the top teams going through automatically and the 8 best runners up go into a Play Off round to progress to a round of 16 and so on from there, that would make a total of about 92 matches.
With only 1 automatic spot, I believe it would be more competitive, meaning that some teams will push harder to win the group rather than settle for 2nd Place...
To win the World Cup you would be playing 7 or 8 matches, depending where you finished in your group
I still think that two group stages is the best sollution. 12 groups of 4 in first one and 2 best placing teams advance further. Then 8 groups of 3 and group winners advance to the knockout. The number of played matches overall and matches played per team still will stay the same
makes qualification easier for every continent besides Europe which has the hardest qualifying round
Europa is not even that hard either
One major advantage of a third place team going through is that if you get 6 points you’re basically guaranteed to go through
I would like to keep the 16 groups of 3 but every team still plays 4 games total. The catch is that their fourth game would be against a team from another group. So all all the final games can still be played simultaneously.
Bullshit comparing teams who had differant opponents
Honestly best format would be 12 groups of 4,
Top 2 of each group go straight to knockout stage (24),
3rd place teams are seeded to play each other, whoever wins goes to knockout,
and then you have a 32 team knockout stage to play.
I feel like this format could make for really good underdog runs as 3rd place teams go off to the quarter or even semi finals. Plus it adds more meaningful matches to the tournament.
The 3rd place teams playing each other would only get you to 30 teams for the knockout stage (6 winners from 3rd place games).
I know this is highly unlikely but It'd be a dream come true just to see Dominican Rep. in the world cup someday.
8 groups of 6. Top 3 of each group advance. Top seed in each group have a bye round while all 2's and 3's play their 1st elimination game. 2nd elimination round is where all group winners play the winners between 2 and 3. Then a regular elimination round format. Most games that can possibly be played would be 5 in group stage, and 5 elimination games. Lowest amount for a group winner could be 9 if they make it to the finals. It would be a gruelling tournament so it would at least need to be 5 weeks long and roster sizes of 36 players.
Groups of 3 are only a problem if two teams advance from them. When only a single team does, groups of 3 work perfectly.
We could use groups of 3 and still play a total of 8 games for the champion. My scenario:
Round 1 Group play: 12 groups of 4; top 2 teams advance [24 teams].
Round 2 Group play: 8 groups of 3; ONLY top team advances [8 teams].
Knockout stages then begin at QF stage [8 teams] - then SF [teams] - Final [2 teams]
It's good and FIFA have done that before. The problem is the amount of time to finish the competition.
I’m still confused about matches taking place in three countries. Where will the final be hosted? Will the competing squads not have to move around once we get through knockout rounds? Say for example your team advances past knockouts, would you have to go to another country to watch their matches?
Im so sick of uefa taking waaaay too many spots
9 from uefa 6 spots from South America 4 from North America 5 Asia 7 from Africa spot ofc off playoff spot concaf and Asia
This would be fair for a 32 team World Cup
Yea I think 48 team World Cup i not a good idea it just favors South America and Africa this 32 team I just told you would be better
I have best format for 48 teams ….
8 groups of 6 .
2 Euro teams per group.
Top 3 of each group quality . 1st , 2nd , 3rd
All 2nd will cross play a 3rd for a knock out .
Winners will cross play a 1st qualifier to end up with a top 16.
Top 16 play off as normal.
Please comment what you think .
I'm curious how many people fly to America for games from other countries - especially with the group stages being expanded to 48 teams. 2026 will be the biggest and best World Cup yet.
I have no doubt that you will watch all 104 games
@@renatasgaudinskas3112 I'm taking a month off work, so yes - I will be trying to watch all the games and attend all the USMNT games.
@@letsexperienceearth3034 i will watch from play off
I'm worried about how the knockout round looks with having 3rd place teams in, who plays who? Cuz I feel like euro cup has that but it's not very good on how teams are spread out, it's uneven and seems like some teams may be matched up unfairly
That is a legitimate concern, but it has to be considered in context. FIFA has expanded the WC to enable more countries - especially from outside Europe - to have a realistic chance of qualifying and - in exchange for the worthy policy - we have to accept some not exactly perfect features in the WC final competition format.
Yes same Problem. Hence, new Format is still shit.
It's the same algorithm they used in 86/90/94, and it did work. All 8 qualified 3rds go against eight preselected 1sts, with a predetermined choosing order so every 1st always play a 3rd from a different group. The other 4 1st play 2nds, and the remaining 4 matches are 2nd vs 2nd.
@@JCCyC letting the 3rds through is just bullshit, how can it be fair to compare teams who had complety different opponents?!
And btw A Team in group L would know exactly what result is needed to secure a spot for the last 32 (by getting through as 3rd and topping a Team from group A e.g.)
@@JCCyC and way too many games
Just keep it to 32 teams. It seems good enough for me
Example: have group A 3 countries play group B 3 countries, this would insure 3 games in cross group play and they would all play the last game at the same time .The top 2 of those 6 of paired groups would advance to the round of round of 16….
Do you think Australia will want to go back to the OFC with this new format, or will they just let New Zealand qualify almost automatically for the WC?
They won't. There is zero value of beating American Samoa 31-0. On top of that they are good enough to qualify in Asia with that many spots. Their biggest problem is that they have been mediocre for years and now they could easily qualify being mediocre. So, they don't have any incentives to improve.
P.S. On the side note, without Australia OFC shouldn't even exist. FIFA should force these guys to merge with Asia.
@@ivanpetrov5185 OFC existing and getting a spot is a scam. That said, many of the small island nations might find it very difficult to afford flying to Syria every second game. The crazy distances involved do make it seem a bit impractical to merge them.
@@adavidavis2762 You are well aware the AFC qualifications are on geographical principle, don't you? There is no way the OFC nations fly to Syria. The whole Middle East and Iran will be closed to them. They will fly to Australia, Japan, both Koreas and the likes. Which is still a lot of travel, but not even close.
@@ivanpetrov5185 The 2022 FIFA World Cup qualifiers literally had Guam and Syria in the same group...
@@adavidavis2762 just regionalize the early qualifying rounds as its slim chance any of the island teams will ever get out of those early rounds anyway. Have Australia move back to Oceania but have the OFC as still part of Asia tournaments and qualifying where only the top two teams in Oceania move on to qualifying and playing tournaments within Asia.
They should get all third place teams and but them in a potlock situation where first eight teams get to go to the round of 32 it could cause drama but it's a fun idea
You are wrong.Extending participants above 24 was disastrous.You probably have no good clue what football and European and World.Championship is. 32 participants was absolute disaster and 48 is just horribly ridiculous. That's not a WC anymore.
so the world cup should be 24 teams according to you ?
I have 2 suggestions:
Suggestion A:
8 groups of 6 teams each. This guarantees each team plays a minimum of 5 games.
The top 4 teams in each group advance to a round of 32.
Suggestion B:
Once again we have 8 groups of 6 teams each. Once again each team plays a minimum of 5 games.
However, only the top 3 teams in each group advance. The advancement works as follows:
(i) Teams which place 2nd and 3rd in each group go into a Playoff Round of 16 whereby the knockout winners of this stage advance into the Final Round of 16;
(ii) What happens to the Group winners? They gain automatic qualification into the Final Round of 16, i.e., they get a bye into the Final Round of 16.
Why do I like the above 2 approaches? It seems to me that qualifying for the WC is such hard work. Why not reward each team with a minimum of 5 games played. Each team would also benefit from playing more teams from other regions of the world.
Has this been done before with each team guaranteed so many games? Yes, albeit in other sports. For example, in the cricket WC of 2003, tournament organizers decided to have groups of 7 teams each with each team guaranteed a minimum of 6 games in the WC.