World Cup Expansion to 48 Teams (Update: FIFA Council Agrees 2026 Slot Allocation)

Strong can be teams that advanced out of group in the past 2 or 3 WCs.

Or it can be the top 50 in the ELO.

Or strong can be teams that have an average of 1 point per game in all WC games played since 1998.

Or strong can mean not coming in last in your group in the last 3 WCs. I like this one becasue it shows you got points in a WC against another team.

Teams that did not finish last in the group in any of the last 2 WCs:

UEFA
Spain
Netherlands
Germany
England
Slovakia
Belgium
France
Switzerland
Greece
Slovenia (finished ahead of Algeria in 2010) 4 points
Denmark (finished ahead of Cameroon in 2010) 3 points
Croatia (finished ahead of Cameroon in 2014) 3 points
Italy (finished ahead of England in 2014) 3 points
Bosnia & H (finished ahead of Iran in 2014) 3 points
Portugal (finished ahead of Ghana in 2014) 4 points
Russia (finished ahead of South Korea in 2014) 2 points

COMNEBOL
Uruguay
Argentina
Brazil
Paraguay
Chile
Colombia
Ecuador (finished ahead of Honduras in 2014) 4 points

CONCACAF
US
Mexico
Costa Rica

AFC
South Korea
Japan
Australia (finished ahead of Serbia in 2010) 4 points

CAF
Algeria
Nigeria
Ghana
South Africa (finished ahead of France in 2010) 4 points
Ivory Coast (finished ahead of N Korea in 2010) 4 points

OFC
New Zealand (finished ahead of Italy in 2010) 3 points

35 teams... 2 shy of 37. Add in Wales and Iceland who both went far in Euros.

Or you could add in Egypt currently ranked highest in CAF or Iran ranked highest in the AFC.

 

Fwiw, only four third-place teams from the six groups advanced out of the group phase.

 

This proves @BocaFan 's post, it's only 12 teams outside of UEFA and Conmebol. Actually less than the current allocation to the three other Confeds combined.

In any event, Slovakia, Denmark, Greece, England, Paraguay, USA, South Africa, Japan, New Zealand are not currently strong.

 

S Korea made it out of group in 2010.

 

No it does not... I listed 37 strong teams. And I only included 2010 and 2016 WC teams. I did not include the teams from 2006.

These teams have all beat another team in a recent WC. At the moment they might not be strong, but in 2018, 2022 or 2026 maybe they are.

 

Well 16 teams currently only play 3 matches.

And we don't know what the rules will be for ties (will there be draws or will they have penalties?) etc

If they go to penalties then there are not that many scenarios.

U20 CONCACAF Championship is currently in a tourney with groups of 3 and the top 2 advance...

Group 1
US played 1 - Won 1 - points 3
Mexico played 2 - Won 1 Lost 1 - points 3
El Salvador played 1 - Lost 1 - points 0

Group 2
Honduras played 2 - won 2 - points 6
Costa Rica played 1 - lost 1 - points 0
Panama played 1 - lost 1 - points 0

First place teams advance to the final game, but the top 2 from each group advance to the U20 WC. In both groups the last game has meaning. US needs a win or tie to lead the group. If they lose it will be a 3 way tie (all 3 teams with 3 points)... with Mexico beating El Salvador 6 - 1. So if US loses it's more a 2 way tie for second with El Salvador. I am not sure the exact tie breakers, but I am guessing 6 - 1 will benefit Mexico.

Group 2, Honduras advances to the final, and the winning team in the last game advances. it cant get much easier then this.

 

How many of the WC10 players for South Korea will be on form in WC18?

A weak team beating a rubbish team at the WC does not make the weak team strong. In any event, you yourself admit that not all of these teams are currently strong, and it's almost certain that will not change for the foreseeable future.

 

10 players from S Korea 2010 will be 34 or younger in 2018.

2 at 34 (GK & D)
2 at 33 (GK & D)
2 at 32
3 at 29
1 at 28

The only "weak" teams that beat "rubbish" teams are Ecuador beating Honduras and Ivory Coast beating N Korea.

I argue both of these teams are still strong teams. Ecuador currently ranked 22nd (ELO 16) and Ivory Coast ranked 47 (ELO 41)

 

My bad.... I worded it wrong. What I meant is any team that did not finish last, at least once, in either 2010 or 2014.

 

CAF currently have three strongs teams (Senegal, Nigeria and a reluctant nod to Egypt), two teams in transition (Cote d'Ivoire and Cameroon), a couple in obvious decline (Ghana, Algeria) and a few question mark teams (DRCongo, South Africa, Mali, Burkina Faso, Morocco).

Will be interesting to see how the noname Cameroon side performs at the Confed Cup, but chances are Nigeria will qualify for the World Cup ahead of them.

 

Agree that "strong" is very subjective, but as to whether strong could be "top 50 in ELO": No it cannot. The number is the thing we're trying to estimate so you can't just say its the top 50 because that gives you the number. Its putting the cart before the horse.

 

Fine how about this?

ELO Super Elite Teams: 2000 plus (these teams should beat any team)
Brazil
Argentina
Germany

ELO Elite Teams: 1900 - 1989 (Beat most teams but should struggle against the Super Elites)
France
Chile
Spain
Italy
England
Portugal
Colombia
Mexico

ELO Super Strong Teams: 1816 - 1898 (Can give the Elites a battle, but should lose against the Super Elites)
Uruguay
Belgium
Netherlands
Croatia
Ecuador
Switzerland
Poland
Peru

ELO Strong Teams: 1701 - 1782 (Can give the Super Strong's a battle, but should lose against the Elites and above)
South Korea
Rep of Ireland
Costa Rica
Iran
Turkey
Iceland
Ukraine
Japan
Wales
Bosnia & H
Sweden
Slovakia
USA
Senegal
Serbia
Australia

ELO Above Average Teams: 1600 - 1695 (Can give the Strong's a battle, but should lose against the Super Strong's and above)
Denmark
Cameroon
Paraguay
Egypt
Czech Rep
Ivory Coast
Russia
Hungary
Venezuela
Austria
Nigeria
Romania
Uzbekistan
Panama
Scotland
Greece
Slovenia
Northern Ireland
Burkina Faso
Bolivia
Israel
South Africa
Algeria

Average and Below: the other 150 or so teams that are below 1599

35 teams that are "strong" or better, and another 23 teams that are just shy of "strong" and can compete against the "strong" group. For a total of 58 teams that are above average NTs or better.

 

God, for our own sake and mental health, and before anyone other than us complains, please take us out of the Super Elites...

 

Too complex for me. I would consider 'strong' as a team that looks and plays like it could at least have a shot at reaching the round of 16 of a WC. So being competitive in at least 2 out of their 3 group stage matches. I say 2 out of 3 since you generally need a draw and a win to advance from a group of 4. Doesn't mean they have to get those results but they have to at least look capable of achieving it. If they look out of their depth then surely they're not too strong.
Using this definition also means the # of strong teams can change over time, which is logical (if you say "above average" or "top 50" the number will never change).

For e.g. Cameroon & Honduras 2014 would fail the test since they never really looked like a team that could go anywhere even with a bit of luck on their side. But Croatia would pass since they played Brasil fairly even and of course got a win. Japan & Ghana would probably also pass. Even though they only got 1 point they had chances to get more.

 

Mexico elite? Ecuador, Peru, Switzerland and Poland "super strong"?

Ridiculous.

 

Mexico – Germany & Brazil are the only 2 teams along with Mexico to make it to the second round in all 5 32 team WCs, starting back in 1998. So yes, Mexico is elite... but they are in the bottom of this elite group or the top of the Super Strong Group.

Ecuador – Currently 3rd in CONMEBOL WC qualifying. They have beat Argentina, Chile and Uruguay in WCQ, and currently ranked 22 by FIFA.

Peru – I agree, Peru should be bumped down to strong.

Switzerland – 2 out of the last 3 WCs Switzerland has made it out of the group, and they are currently leading their WCQ group.

Poland – Has not been in the WC since 2006, but they are leading their WCQ group (although it is not very strong of a group.) They did however make it to quarters in Euros, and lost out to Portugal in penalties. Poland is at the bottom of the Super Strong or the top of the Strong group.

So I disagree on 4 of these, but we agree on Peru. And whether these teams are elite/super strong, or super strong/strong does not matter much... these are all strong teams, some are just stronger then others on this list.

 

lol Asia better than Africa.
How did you get to that conclusion?

 

Are you asking me this question?

 

Yes, the best Asian teams ranks above Africa's elite teams.

 

I was just using ELO as a guide. There are flaws in the ELO system, and for whatever reason this is how the teams are currently ranked. But the CAF and AFC are all close.

These are the teams I have listed. 5 AFC to 8 CAF. At the moment AFC are ranked slightly better.... this can all change in a few matches. AFC are in red.

ELO STRONG TEAMS (1700 to 1799)
S Korea 1782 (FIFA 39)
Iran 1766 (FIFA 32)
Japan 1745 (FIFA 52)
Senegal 1709 (FIFA 31)
Australia 1701 (FIFA 54)

ELO ABOVE AVERAGE TEAMS (1600 to 1699)
Cameroon 1685 (FIFA 33)
Egypt 1678 (FIFA 23)
Ivory Coast 1672 (FIFA 47)
Nigeria 1662 (FIFA 41)
Uzbekistan 1657 (FIFA 63)
Burkina Faso 1618 (FIFA 38)
S Africa 1604 (FIFA 62)
Algeria 1600 (FIFA 50)

I agree that Cameroon, Egypt, Ivory Coast and Nigeria should all be bumped up into the strong group, but this is just how they are currently ranked.

 

maybe this is a little better...

ELO Super Elite Teams: 1950 plus (these teams should beat any team)
Brazil
Argentina
Germany
France
Chile
Spain

ELO Elite Teams: 1850 - 1949 (Beat most teams but should struggle against the Super Elites)
Italy
England
Portugal
Colombia
Mexico
Uruguay
Belgium
Netherlands
Croatia

ELO Super Strong Teams: 1750 - 1848 (Can give the Elites a battle, but should lose against the Super Elites)
Ecuador
Switzerland
Poland
Peru
South Korea
Rep of Ireland
Costa Rica
Iran
Turkey

ELO Strong Teams: 1650 - 1749 (Can give the Super Strong's a battle, but should lose against the Elites and above)
Iceland
Ukraine
Japan
Wales
Bosnia & H
Sweden
Slovakia
USA
Senegal
Serbia
Australia
Denmark
Cameroon
Paraguay
Egypt
Czech Rep
Ivory Coast
Russia
Hungary
Venezuela
Austria
Nigeria
Romania
Uzbekistan

ELO Above Average Teams: 1600 - 1649 (Can give the Strong's a battle, but should lose against the Super Strong's and above)
Panama
Scotland
Greece
Slovenia
Northern Ireland
Burkina Faso
Bolivia
Israel
South Africa
Algeria

Average and Below: the other 150 or so teams that are below 1599

48 teams that are "strong" or better, and another 10 teams that are just shy of "strong" and can compete against the "strong" group. For a total of 58 teams that are above average NTs or better.