BEST FORMAT for 2026 WORLD CUP: 40 countries + 8 countries (no need to worry about collusion)

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

Another option:

A tournament in November 2025 among the 8 countries to decide the two countries that advance to the knockout round of 32.

November 2025: mini World Cup tournament among the 8 countries
June/July 2026: main World Cup with 40 countries (10 groups of 4 with double elimination format)

The 2 winners of the 8 countries + the 30 winners of the 40 countries = 32 knockout round

So when June 2026 comes the focus of the WORLD CUP would be among these 40 countries...to see which ones can make it out of their group through double elimination format (aka one win to advance, lost both games go home)

Each game will be very exciting and meaningful. Advantages: no match fixing. No imbalance schedule. Every game is meaningful (there are a few World Cup Group Stage games that were meaningless regarding who win / lose since they have already been eliminated).

The meat of the tournament will be in the knockout round of 32. But the double elimination group stage (10 groups of 4) is also very exciting.

That hypothetical mini playoff tournament will replace this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_FIFA_World_Cup

Playoff tournament

A playoff tournament involving six teams will be held to decide the last two FIFA World Cup berths,[20] consisting of one team per confederation (except for UEFA) and one additional team from the confederation of the host countries (i.e. CONCACAF).

Two of the teams will be seeded based on the FIFA World Rankings, and the seeded teams will play for a FIFA World Cup berth against the winners of the first two knockout games involving the four unseeded teams.

The tournament is to be played in one or more of the host countries and to be used as a test event for the FIFA World Cup. The existing playoff window of November 2025 has been suggested as a tentative date for the 2026 edition.

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

A hypothetical World Cup with 48 countries using 2018 World Cup Qualifying results

4.5 to 8 slots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_(AFC)

Iran
South Korea
Syria
Uzbekistan --------------goes into the 8 countries stage

Japan
Saudi Arabia
Australia
UAE --------------goes into the 8 countries stage

4.5 slots to 7 slots

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification#CONMEBOL

1 Brazil
2 Uruguay
3 Argentina
4 Colombia
5 Peru
6 Chile
7 Paraguay --------------goes into the 8 countries stage

3.5 spots to 7 spots including host
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CONCACAF_Fifth_Round

Canada (host)
USA (host)
Mexico (host)

Costa Rica
Panama

Honduras ----------------------8 countries stage
Trinidad and Tobago -------8 countries stage

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_OFC_Third_Round

New Zealand -------------8 countries stage

5 slots to 9 slots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CAF_Third_Round

Tunisia
Nigeria
Morocco
Senegal
Egypt

DR Congo
Burkina Faso

Uganda -------------to the 8 countries stage
Ivory Coast --------to the 8 countries stage

13 slots to 16 slots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification#UEFA

France
Portugal
Germany
Serbia
Poland
England
Spain
Belgium
Iceland

Switzerland
Italy
Denmark
Croatia
Sweden
North Ireland
Greece

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

The 8 countries with worst qualifying results will have a mini World Cup in November 2025 to decide the two countries advancing the World Cup knockout round of 32. It could look like this:

Group A:

Uzbekistan
Trinidad and Tobago
Ivory Coast
New Zealand

Group B:

UAE
Honduras
Uganda
Paraguay

There are a few ways to decide 2 teams that enter the World Cup Knockout Round of 32

1) Group Stage (3 games each for each country). Group Winner advance

2) Group Stage (3 games each for each country) Group Winner and Group Runner up advance to playoff.

Winner (Group A) vs runner up (Group B)
Winner (Group B) vs runner up (Group A)

3) Playoff (8 countries to 4 countries to 2 countries)

Uzbekistan
UAE
Honduras
Trinidad and Tobago
Uganda
Ivory Coast
Paraguay
New Zealand

The bad thing about this playoff is that 4 countries will be eliminated after 1 game. Which is not ideal. So I prefer either Option 1 or Option 2.

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

MAIN WORLD CUP (40 countries) 10 groups of 4 (double elimination)

France
Portugal
Germany
Serbia
Poland
England
Spain
Belgium
Iceland
Switzerland
Italy
Denmark
Croatia
Sweden
North Ireland
Greece

Brazil
Uruguay
Argentina
Colombia
Peru
Chile

Tunisia
Nigeria
Morocco
Senegal
Egypt
DR Congo
Burkina Faso

Canada (host)
USA (host)
Mexico (host)
Costa Rica
Panama

Iran
South Korea
Syria
Japan
Saudi Arabia
Australia

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

SEEDINGS for 2018 World Cup
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup#Draw

SEEDINGS for 2026 World Cup using current ranking (40 countries stage double elimination stage)
https://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/ranking-table/men/

Pot 1 (strongest + hosts)

Canada (host) ---------- should Canada get pot 1 seeding?
USA (host) --------(#22 in ranking)
Mexico (host) --(#9 in ranking)
Belgium (1)
France (2)
Brazil (3)
England (4)
Portugal (5)
Spain (6)
Argentina (7)

Pot 2 (next strongest)

Uruguay (8)
Italy (10)
Croatia (11)
Denmark (12)
Germany (13)
Columbia (15)
Switzerland (16)
Chile (17)
Poland (19)
Senegal (20)

Pot 3:

Sweden (21)
Peru (25)
Tunisia (26)
Japan (27)
Iran (29)
Serbia (30)
Morocco (33)
Nigeria (36)
South Korea (38)
Australia (41)

Pot 4:

North Ireland (45)
Iceland (46)
Egypt (49)
Costa Rica (50)
Greece (53)
Burkina Faso (58)
DR Congo (60)
Saudi Arabia (67)
Syria (76)
Panama (78)

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

USING a random 1-10 number generator to create some groups
https://numbergenerator.org/randomnumbergenerator/1-10

Pot 1 vs Pot 4
Pot 2 vs Pot 3

Group A: (got number 8,6,9,4)

Portugal
Columbia
South Korea
Costa Rica

Match 1: Portugal vs Costa Rica
Match 2: Columbia vs South Korea
Match 3: loser of match 1 vs loser of match 2

Group B: (got number 9, 2, 5, 7)

Spain
Italy
Iran
DR Congo

Match 1: Spain vs DR Congo
Match 2: Italy vs Iran
Match 3: loser of match 1 vs loser of match 2

Group C: (got number 9, invalid, got 4 ok, got 2 invalid, got 1, got 10, got 7 invalid, got 2)

Belgium
Uruguay
Australia
Iceland

Match 1: Belgium vs Iceland
Match 2: Uruguay vs Australia
Match 3: loser of match 1 vs loser of match 2

Group D:

Argentina
Germany
Peru
Saudi Arabia

Argentina vs Saudi Arabia
Germany vs Peru
loser vs loser

Group E:

Canada
Denmark
Serbia
Egypt

Canada vs Egypt
Denmark vs Serbia
loser vs loser

Group F:

Brazil
Poland
South Korea
Greece

Brazil vs Greece
Poland vs South Korea
loser match 1 vs loser match 2

anyone want to fill out the rest of the groups using random number generator?

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

here's a crazy thought:

extra match between winner of match 1 and winner of group 2
The winner gets special SEEDING and the right to choose their next opponent in the round of 32.

Group B:

Spain
Italy
Iran
DR Congo

Match 1: Spain vs DR Congo ---Spain won and advance
Match 2: Italy vs Iran ------Italy won and advance
Match 3: loser DR Congo vs loser Iran ----the winner advance
Match 4: Spain vs Italy -----winner get special SEEDING and to choose its opponent

Let's say Spain won. In the knockout round of 32, it gets to choose its opponent.

All 10 winners get to decide their opponents. Order by FIFA ranking.

So if Belgium (1) won their group, they get to pick first.
France (2) if won their group, get to pick second etc...

It would be exciting. Instead of a random draw, the 10 winners get to pick.

The other 12 countries not pick will get to be a 2 pot lottery draw. Italy (who lost) and not picked by the 10 winners, would be part of these 12 countries. Get a much tougher draw.

This give EXTRA INCENTIVE to be the group winner. Group winner gets easier opponent in the round of 32.

Spanish coach went to the podium: We, Spain, pick South Korea as our opponent in the knockout round of 32.

vevo5 · Feb 19, 2021

Group D:

Argentina
Germany
Peru
Saudi Arabia

Match 1: Argentina vs Saudi Arabia
Match 2: Germany vs Peru
Match 3: Saudi Arabia (loser) vs Peru (loser)
Match 4: Argentina (winner) vs. Germany (winner)

Winner gets to choose their opponent in the round of 32. Easier opponent.

Loser will get into a tough draw (12 teams not picked).

similar with Group C. Belgium and Uruguay would definitely want to win their group in order to get an easier opponent (get to pick) in the 32 knockout round

Group C:

Belgium
Uruguay
Australia
Iceland

These extra 10 matches would be great for TV viewing. FIFA would love it.

And the schedule allow it to happen since the other 2 losers in their groups are playing on Match 3. Match 4 could take place on the same day.

Match 1 (June 10): Argentina vs Saudi Arabia
Match 2 (June 10): Germany vs Peru
Match 3 (June 16): Saudi Arabia (loser) vs Peru (loser)
Match 4 (June 16): Argentina (winner) vs. Germany (winner)

Knockout round of 32: June 22

if match 4 doesn't happen, then Argentina and Germany would get a very long rest compare to Saudi Arabia and Peru who play on June 16

If I am running FIFA I would definitely make sure that match #4 exist. The 10 winners choosing their (weaker) opponents would also make for great drama.

Imagine Spain picking South Korea and Spain lost.....

Strong teams that could be in that draw of 12 could be the likes of Italy, Germany, Uruguay, Columbia etc...
They didn't win the group but they didn't get pick by the 10 winners.

10 winners get to pick.
Each country get 10 minutes to make a decision.
100 minutes of pure drama.

FIFA would televise it of course. Much better exciting than the World Cup Group Stage Draw.

So Belgium goes first. France second.

Holiday_Jenkins · Feb 23, 2021

vevo5 said: ↑

too many games (from the current 64 matches to 104 matches)
it would extend the tournament time
the knockout bracket would be unbalanced

https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-sports-analytics/jsa200414

12 groups of four. The 12 group winners, 12 runners-up, and eight best third-place teams would advance to the round of 32. However, with 72 group matches and a total of 104 games, the World Cup would then last at least one more week, assuming four group matches per day. Both the current format (1998-2018, 64 games) and the three-team group format (80 games) can be completed in 32 days. Since the number of groups would not be a power of two, the knockout bracket would be unbalanced, in the sense that some group winners would play against third-placed teams in the round of 32, while other group winners would play against runners-up, and some runners-up would play against each other, like it happened during the round of 16 of the 1986, 1990, and 1994 FIFA World Cups, and during the 2016 UEFA Euro, and like it will happen during the Euro 2020. See Guyon (2018b) for a detailed study of such unbalanced brackets.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/38577001

The number of tournament matches will rise to 80, from 64, but the eventual winners will still play only seven games.

The tournament will be completed within 32 days - a measure to appease powerful European clubs, who objected to reform because of a crowded international schedule.
Click to expand...

You'd play 6 group matches per day through the first two matches for each team. For the last group match you'd play 8 matches per day.

vevo5 · Mar 3, 2021

from this reddit topic that has a lot of comments:

https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/5mwf3a/oc_why_the_proposed_3team_group_stage_for_the/

Why the proposed 3-team group stage for the World Cup is a terrible idea

How a biscotto is possible in the proposed 3-team groups
FIFA is suggesting that all matches will have a winner and a loser. I'm going to assume that we keep 3 points for a win (although it really makes no difference if draws aren't possible: the result will be the same whether a win is worth 1 point or 100 points).

Detailed example
Matchday 1: A beats B 1-0

Matchday 2: C beats A 2-0

We then have the following table before the final game:

Team P W D L GD Pts
C 1 1 0 0 +2 3
A 2 1 0 1 -1 3
B 1 1 0 0 -1 0
In the final game, B plays C. C agrees (implicitly or explicitly) to allow B to win 1-0, resulting in the following final table:

Team P W D L GD Pts
C (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 +1 3
B (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 0 3
A (Eliminated) 2 1 0 1 -1 3
As we can see, C and B have taken advantage of playing the last game to ensure that they both progress at the expense of A.

How likely is this to happen?
A moment's thought should demonstrate that the example above could have happened equally with C and B reversed. In fact, a biscotto happens whenever team A finishes with one win, one loss, and a zero or negative goal difference. Just for fun, I'll illustrate that with a set of results where every game is decided by a penalty shootout (also demonstrating the inanity of FIFA's claim that penalty shootouts will eliminate the biscotto):

Matchday 1: A draws with B 0-0 (A wins on penalties)

Matchday 2: C draws with A 0-0 (C wins on penalties)

Matchday 3: B draws with C 1-1 (B wins on penalties)

Team P W D L GF GA GD Pts
B (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 3
C (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 3
A (Eliminated) 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 3
A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that, if all teams are of equal quality, we should expect to see this situation somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 of the time. In reality, where teams are not of equal quality, it is somewhat less likely than this (team A could be much better or worse than the others, and thus finish with two wins or two losses), but nevertheless remains a clear possibility.

from a comment that has a lot of likes:

The Penalty thing is a terrible idea too. We may have a lot of teams that just park the bus for 90 minutes and still gain the 3 points on Penalties. Everything in that system is just so bad, I don't know who get that idea and why.

vevo5 · Mar 3, 2021

Using 2018 World Cup qualifying (hence the Netherlands not in it) with current FIFA ranking. Using random number generator to generate these groups:

Match 1: Seed #1 vs Seed #4: Winner advance
Match 2: Seed #2 vs Seed #3: Winner advance
Match 3: Loser match 1 vs Loser match 2: Winner advance

Group A:

Portugal
Columbia
South Korea
Costa Rica

Example;
Match 1: Portugal vs Costa Rica: winner advance
Match 2: Columbia vs South Korea: winner advance
Match 3: loser of match 1 vs loser of match 2: winner advance

Group B:

Spain
Italy
Iran
DR Congo

Group C:

Belgium
Uruguay
Australia
Iceland

Group D:

Argentina
Germany
Peru
Saudi Arabia

Group E:

Canada
Denmark
Serbia
Egypt

Group F:

Brazil
Poland
Japan
Greece

Group G:

Mexico
Switzerland
Nigeria
Burkina Faso

Group H:

England
Senegal
Morocco
North Ireland

Group I:

USA
Croatia
Tunisia
Syria

Group J:

France
Chile
Sweden
Panama

For the two special groups. Each country plays 3 games. Group winner advance. (very weak group but only winner advance)

Special Group 1:

Uzbekistan
Trinidad and Tobago
Ivory Coast
New Zealand

Special Group 2:

UAE
Honduras
Uganda
Paraguay

32 countries will advance to the round of 32 knockout. 30 from group A to J and 2 from the two special groups.

current 32 teams World Cup: 64 matches
FIFA 2026 with 16 groups of 3: 80 matches
40 countries + 8 countries World Cup: 74 matches

Disadvantages of this format: the 8 countries (with worst qualifying results) do not have the same hurdle as the other 40 countries.

Advantages: balanced schedule, no matching fixing / collusion (the 16 groups of 3 will most likely have match fixing / collusion and 100% certainty of unbalanced schedule)

vevo5 · Mar 3, 2021

Where do I get these 48 countries? Why Netherlands not in it?

Using 2018 World Cup Qualifying results

4.5 to 8 slots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_(AFC)

Iran
South Korea
Syria
Uzbekistan --------------goes into the 8 countries stage

Japan
Saudi Arabia
Australia
UAE --------------goes into the 8 countries stage

4.5 slots to 7 slots

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification#CONMEBOL

1 Brazil
2 Uruguay
3 Argentina
4 Colombia
5 Peru
6 Chile
7 Paraguay --------------goes into the 8 countries stage

3.5 spots to 7 spots including host
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CONCACAF_Fifth_Round

Canada (host)
USA (host)
Mexico (host)

Costa Rica
Panama

Honduras ----------------------8 countries stage
Trinidad and Tobago -------8 countries stage

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_OFC_Third_Round

New Zealand -------------8 countries stage

5 slots to 9 slots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification_–_CAF_Third_Round

Tunisia
Nigeria
Morocco
Senegal
Egypt

DR Congo
Burkina Faso

Uganda -------------to the 8 countries stage
Ivory Coast --------to the 8 countries stage

13 slots to 16 slots
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_FIFA_World_Cup_qualification#UEFA

France
Portugal
Germany
Serbia
Poland
England
Spain
Belgium
Iceland

Switzerland
Italy
Denmark
Croatia
Sweden
North Ireland
Greece

vevo5 · Mar 3, 2021

SEEDINGS for 2026 World Cup using current ranking (40 countries stage double elimination stage)
https://www.fifa.com/fifa-world-ranking/ranking-table/men/

Pot 1 (strongest + hosts)

Canada (host) ---------- should Canada get pot 1 seeding?
USA (host) --------(#22 in ranking)
Mexico (host) --(#9 in ranking)
Belgium (1)
France (2)
Brazil (3)
England (4)
Portugal (5)
Spain (6)
Argentina (7)

Pot 2 (next strongest)

Uruguay (8)
Italy (10)
Croatia (11)
Denmark (12)
Germany (13)
Columbia (15)
Switzerland (16)
Chile (17)
Poland (19)
Senegal (20)

Pot 3:

Sweden (21)
Peru (25)
Tunisia (26)
Japan (27)
Iran (29)
Serbia (30)
Morocco (33)
Nigeria (36)
South Korea (38)
Australia (41)

Pot 4:

North Ireland (45)
Iceland (46)
Egypt (49)
Costa Rica (50)
Greece (53)
Burkina Faso (58)
DR Congo (60)
Saudi Arabia (67)
Syria (76)
Panama (78)

vevo5 · Mar 3, 2021

DISADVANTAGES of the proposed 16 groups of 3

- unbalanced schedules
- match fixing / collusion

https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-sports-analytics/jsa200414

Using groups of three may look harmless, but it actually raises several fairness issues. The first obvious issue is schedule imbalance. Let us denote by A the team that will play the first two group games, B the team that will play the first and last group matches, and C the remaining team, which will play the last two group games (see Table 1). Team B will enjoy more rest days between their two group matches than Teams A and C; Team A, if they advance to the knockout round, will enjoy more rest days than the other advancing team; Team C will have none of these benefits.

A more serious issue is the subject of this article: the risk of match fixing (or collusion). As soon as Match 2 is finished (see Table 1), Teams B and C will know what results of Match 3 will let them advance to the knockout stage. Those teams may be tempted to collude when a result lets both of them advance, at the expense of Team A. Suspicion of collusion can badly harm the tournament and the reputation of soccer in general, whether the match is actually fixed or not, since outcome uncertainty is at the very root of sport’s popularity. Not all teams would collude if given the opportunity, but even suspicion of coordination could damage the World Cup by casting doubt on the sincerity of the outcome. When collusion does occur, it need not be explicitly agreed upon before the match. It may simply take the form of two teams satisfied with the current score more or less late in a game and refusing or doing little to attack each other.

from this reddit topic that has a lot of comments:

https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/5mwf3a/oc_why_the_proposed_3team_group_stage_for_the/

Why the proposed 3-team group stage for the World Cup is a terrible idea

How a biscotto is possible in the proposed 3-team groups
FIFA is suggesting that all matches will have a winner and a loser. I'm going to assume that we keep 3 points for a win (although it really makes no difference if draws aren't possible: the result will be the same whether a win is worth 1 point or 100 points).

Detailed example
Matchday 1: A beats B 1-0

Matchday 2: C beats A 2-0

We then have the following table before the final game:

Team P W D L GD Pts
C 1 1 0 0 +2 3
A 2 1 0 1 -1 3
B 1 1 0 0 -1 0
In the final game, B plays C. C agrees (implicitly or explicitly) to allow B to win 1-0, resulting in the following final table:

Team P W D L GD Pts
C (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 +1 3
B (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 0 3
A (Eliminated) 2 1 0 1 -1 3
As we can see, C and B have taken advantage of playing the last game to ensure that they both progress at the expense of A.

How likely is this to happen?
A moment's thought should demonstrate that the example above could have happened equally with C and B reversed. In fact, a biscotto happens whenever team A finishes with one win, one loss, and a zero or negative goal difference. Just for fun, I'll illustrate that with a set of results where every game is decided by a penalty shootout (also demonstrating the inanity of FIFA's claim that penalty shootouts will eliminate the biscotto):

Matchday 1: A draws with B 0-0 (A wins on penalties)

Matchday 2: C draws with A 0-0 (C wins on penalties)

Matchday 3: B draws with C 1-1 (B wins on penalties)

Team P W D L GF GA GD Pts
B (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 3
C (Progressed) 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 3
A (Eliminated) 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 3
A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that, if all teams are of equal quality, we should expect to see this situation somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 of the time. In reality, where teams are not of equal quality, it is somewhat less likely than this (team A could be much better or worse than the others, and thus finish with two wins or two losses), but nevertheless remains a clear possibility.

from a comment that has a lot of likes:

The Penalty thing is a terrible idea too. We may have a lot of teams that just park the bus for 90 minutes and still gain the 3 points on Penalties. Everything in that system is just so bad, I don't know who get that idea and why.

Ivan Soldo · Apr 14, 2021

40team WC with 10 groups of 4 was a better option. 10 first placed teams with 2 best second placed teams advancing to last 16 while other 8 second placed teams would play an additional round to get to last 16. The countries that would get 6 points from first two games would not play third game in the group for pride because they would need to win to avoid the additional round. The only flaw would be number of total games which would increase to 80. Uefa clubs would be probably against this because WC would last longer but fifa could compensate that by reducing number of games in qualifying.
Second option would be to have 10 groups of 4 with 10 group winners and 6 best second placed teams advancing to last 16.
Third option is to have 11 groups of 4 where 11 winners would advance to last 16 with 5 best second placed teams or 10 best second placed teams out of 11 could play an additional round.
I think WC with 48 teams is a terrible idea. I don't think that way because of the number of teams. Problem is in the groups of 3 and playing only two games in group, in teams making too many calculations etc. Fifa 2026 will be full of scandals. There is not a group of 3 in any sports with teams playing only two games in group. Ther for that it's bad and it doesn't work.

Ofori · May 2, 2021

My proposal

- 12 groups of 4 teams
- Best 2 teams go on to the Round of 32
- Best 8 3rd place teams advance to the Round of 32 depending on goal difference

If we are to assume a 48-team World Cup, then how else could it be formatted? One possibility is to just re-use the format for the 1994 World Cup but with twice as many teams. In this case, there would be 12 groups of 4. The top two would qualify to knockouts directly, and the top 8 of 12 third placed teams would also qualify. This format has two issues: (1) It would increase the number of games played by the finalists from seven to eight, which UEFA would doubtlessly protest, and (2) it would result in a World Cup with 104 matches, putting a heavy burden on the host country.

The first real alternative is to have only the top team in each group qualify directly to knockouts, along with 4 of the 12 runner ups. This would result in only 88 matches played, which is on the higher end of the options considered by FIFA. This format solves all of the issues with the current 48 team format, but at the cost of only allowing a few of the second place teams to go through. This means that most groups would have three out of four teams eliminated in the first round.

r0adrunner · May 2, 2021

But that would mean several teams would have no hope of qualification after two GS games.

vevo5 · May 10, 2021

Ivan Soldo said: ↑

40team WC with 10 groups of 4 was a better option. 10 first placed teams with 2 best second placed teams advancing to last 16 while other 8 second placed teams would play an additional round to get to last 16. The countries that would get 6 points from first two games would not play third game in the group for pride because they would need to win to avoid the additional round. The only flaw would be number of total games which would increase to 80. Uefa clubs would be probably against this because WC would last longer but fifa could compensate that by reducing number of games in qualifying.
Second option would be to have 10 groups of 4 with 10 group winners and 6 best second placed teams advancing to last 16.
Third option is to have 11 groups of 4 where 11 winners would advance to last 16 with 5 best second placed teams or 10 best second placed teams out of 11 could play an additional round.
I think WC with 48 teams is a terrible idea. I don't think that way because of the number of teams. Problem is in the groups of 3 and playing only two games in group, in teams making too many calculations etc. Fifa 2026 will be full of scandals. There is not a group of 3 in any sports with teams playing only two games in group. Ther for that it's bad and it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

40 countries would be better than 48 countries.

32 countries would be better than 40 countires.

But what are the chances that FIFA will vote to change from 48 to 40? or change from 48 to 32?

0.001%

The issue is how to make the best of what we got. 48 countries World Cup.

What format is best for 48 countries WC.

JLSA · May 11, 2021

vevo5 said: ↑

40 countries would be better than 48 countries.

32 countries would be better than 40 countires.

But what are the chances that FIFA will vote to change from 48 to 40? or change from 48 to 32?

0.001%

The issue is how to make the best of what we got. 48 countries World Cup.

What format is best for 48 countries WC.
Click to expand...

Maybe - given the UEFA CL changes - we could go for a Swiss Model in the First Round - 3 games each. Given the requirements of the next phase (and some sort of "equal-ish" gaps between the first and second rounds we might have say:

8 Groups of 6. Each team plays 3 matches within it's group - with the third round games in groups of 3 at once (rather than the current 2 at once) to prevent collusion. Top 4 (or possibly 2) in each group advance at then it's just traditional knockout. That would be (with top 4) 1A v 4B, 2A v 3B (similar for B v A and C and D etc) and then more cross overs. 1A-4B v 2C-3D or something.

This is a bit like the system that someone kept banging on about here every now and again (maybe it's exactly the same - who can remember). I argued against it before because noone would understand it - but once the UCL has been using it for a few years that argument disappears. IIRC the earlier screed was a bit too complex - keep it as simple as possible and it should be better than the system we are going to have for 2026.

I mean, it could hardly be worse.

J

Ofori · May 11, 2021

I still think 12 groups of 4 teams with best 2 advancing and best 8 out of 12 third place teams advance into the Round of 32 makes the most sense and it doesn't stow confusion and negates collusion like I said. It keeps everything balanced.

BocaFan · May 11, 2021

Ofori said: ↑

One possibility is to just re-use the format for the 1994 World Cup but with twice as many teams. In this case, there would be 12 groups of 4. The top two would qualify to knockouts directly, and the top 8 of 12 third placed teams would also qualify. This format has two issues: (1) It would increase the number of games played by the finalists from seven to eight, which UEFA would doubtlessly protest, and (2) it would result in a World Cup with 104 matches, putting a heavy burden on the host country.
Click to expand...

#2 is a good point and probably a point that isn't considered enough whenever we start discussing WC formats. It not only puts a heavy burden on the host country(ies) but also fatigues the viewers. We are looking at probably 6 matches per day to start, and maybe as much as 8 per day for the final round of group stage matches.

I tend to think that the WC shouldn't have so many matches that it isn't even feasible for a diehard fan to watch more than half of them.

I think this issue is what might cause us to be stuck with the 16 groups of 3 format for longer than we might think. Personally, I'd prefer they adopt something similar to the new 2024 Champions League format. Four groups and you play 3 teams in your 12-team group. Top 6 advance advance, top 2 get a bye to the round of 16. Issue #2 that you highlight above would still exist, but all the other problems associated with 12 groups of 4 format would disappear.

shizzle787 · Jul 13, 2021

It is going to 64 teams sooner rather than later.

r0adrunner · Jul 14, 2021

Not if ECA has anything to do with it!

HomietheClown · Jul 14, 2021

64 teams single elimination. No Group Stage.
Teams are seeded 1-64 according to FIFA rankings no matter what confederation they are from.

Losers bracket after the first round. Winner of the losers gets a lot of money and some sort of trophy.

HomietheClown · Jul 14, 2021

To promote scoring I would say if the score is 0-0 in the first round the higher seed advances.
Draws with goals go to penalties.
It would be incentive for teams to not park the bus.