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

FIFA (and probably host countries too) want more games, not less. Too much money in tickets and TV revenue these days. Not only does single elimination mean fewer matches but half of all the matches would need to be condensed into the first 5-6 days of the tournament. [I love the first two weeks of World cups because it means 3-4 matches every day and no off-days! ]

Double elimination tournament would solve both issues though, and its not a big deviation from single elimination format. So why not just have the losers of the first round play each other? Way more fun for fans of teams that have no real chance of getting past the round of 32.

 

Sounds good.

 

Or use a Swiss style tournament bracket for the group stages.

I think that if teams are not guaranteed at least 3 games, as they currently are, it isn't going to feel like the World Cup for them. That's why I was going to suggest 8 groups of 6, swiss style bracket, with the top 2 advancing to the round of 16 (or top 4 to the round of 32). Disadvantage is possibly more 'dead' games, and something you & others pointed out about the sheer # of matches.

Regarding the 40 team tournament scenario, I would personally be in favor of 8 groups of 5, top 2 from each advancing to round of 16. Again, disadvantage is total # of group matches (though probably more feasible than 12 groups of 4), and the uneven timing of bye's (would have to give based on pre-tournament seeding). Would love to CONCACAF or AFC test out this format with a 15 team (3 groups of 5) confederation championship one year.

 

Most teams (in a 64 team tournament) that will be eliminated after two matches will probably just be happy to be there anyway.
There isn't a need for three guaranteed matches.

 

If that's true then we can do without those teams in the WC.

After Qatare EURO will be a better tournament for fans to watch than the WC, even for those outside Europe.

 

I do not know about that.
Maybe when it comes to the Group stage. (Maybe.)
But a do-or-die Round of 32 in a World Cup is going to be pretty exciting.

 

How about a 3-vs-3 group format?

Each group would have three A teams and three B teams, so the three A teams play the three B teams.

The points table is combined, and ties are determined by the results between the respective teams. So if two teams have 2 wins / 1 loss, the team that won the match between them would be ranked higher.

The two two teams would advance to round of 16.

 

Swiss system for 2026 WC sounds like a great idea to me, a way of making the unworkable somewhat workable.

8 groups of 6 teams, each team plays 3 games and the top 2 qualify for the last 16, then the competition would proceed as now with knock-out rounds.

I wonder whether FIFA would re-consider its current format in exchange for this one?

 

FIFA probably won't, though they should. The key would be keeping each group of 6 in 2-3 cities that are fairly close to each other/same country/time zone to cut down on the travel. This really should be doable, even with the dual hosts.

 

Well, starting in 2024 the Champions League format is being changed in a similar direction so I wouldn’t be surprised if WC does something similar. Especially after seeing what a flop the sixteen groups of 3 is.

Unfortunately I think the Swiss system happens in 2030 at the earliest so 2026 will be a sacrificial lamb.

 

I am glad you have a crystal ball and can predict the future.

 

I am basing it on the past, actually.

 

The past never had 48 teams in it.


We have had this conversation before.

 

Well, obviously. But 16 groups means no head-to-head matchups of teams in the top 16 of the FIFA ranking. When you look back at past WC group stages many of the most memorable matches wouldn't have existed if the top 16 had been kept in separate groups: US v England, Netherlands v Spain, Portugal v Spain, Croatia v Argentina, England v Italy .... just to name a few off the top of my head.

 

For the day where we arrive at 64 teams it's the only viable format I see.

Otherwise FIFA need to modify the International Calendar and leave more space for a six week's World Cup.
Or split group stage and elimination rounds into two different timeframes. Like group stage in March/April and the rest in June/July.

 

Even if you had a group stage (16 groups of 4) followed by KO stages (5 rounds), a 64-team WC wouldn't have any more matchdays than the 48-team format of the 2026 WC. (8 matchdays). So it could still be done in about 32-33 days. (This also highlights that the 2026 format is quite inefficient)

 

Yes, but the Round of 32 do-or-die round is going to be better than a 32 Group stage in my mind.
And there's going to be a lot of Group stage first timers that will be darlings of the World Cup.
It is going to be nice seeing new faces and new fan bases in the World Cup and feel so joyful.

 

True, but we had that discussion before. Now we're just talking about what is the best format to deal with the awkward # of teams - 48 (Swiss style 8 groups of 6 v round robin 16 groups of 3 ). Both formats would/could still have 32 teams in the knockout stage.

That's why I hope the 2024 CL format is a success. My concern is that because they not only changed the CL format but also increased the # of matchdays that it will generate a lot of complaints, resulting in the Swiss format being surrounded by negativity. Which will be kind of ironic because the Swiss style format is specifically deigned to reduce the length of a tournament.

 

The Swiss system format comprising 8 groups of 6 teams could qualify the top 2 teams in each group after each team has played 3 games, enabling the knockout stage to begin - as it does now - with a round of 16.

Obviously this also has the advantage of maintaining the current requirement for no team to play more than 7 games.

 

I rather see a knockout of 32. That is what I am most excited about with expansion.

 

The group stage is 60% of the tournament though. And on paper the best match of that 60% will be something like Brazil vs Poland or Germany vs Paraguay , since the top 16 (13 + hosts?) teams will all be separated.

Even 12 groups of 4 would have been much better.

I sort of get what you're saying but generally with these sorts of things the stories tend to be a lot more fun than the actual football.

Like yeah, sure, I could see myself getting totally pumped for Egypt vs Haiti or something like that.

The problem is 90% of the time the actual game ends up being some 1-0 or 2-0 snooze fest Egypt win where Haiti can't string together more than two passes in a row and Egypt can't score to save their lives until some guy finally gets a scrappy goal off a parried free kick or something.

 

Even so. People are trying to have it both ways and say that we are going to have all these problems mathematically with a 3 team Group stage and tie breakers. If what you are saying is true and we are going to have lopsided Groups then there is no need to worry about tie breakers and such.
I just hate when people complain about something without even seeing how it is played out first. It is preempted whining and crying.

 

I have said this multiple times in multiple threads if you do not like it then do not watch.
Just tune in for the Round of 32 just like any other World Cup.

To me the Group stage is going to be a little like qualifiers/ qualifying playoffs. Not the best of games at times but in this case the pageantry and the buzz and the people in the stands will still overcome that.
There is nothing like the atmosphere of a World Cup. Add in new sets of passionate fans who have been waiting decades to make it and it will be even more exciting.

 

The nice thing about the Swiss style system (8 groups of 6), is you can easily go with a knockout round of 32 or 16; would only need to add 4-5 days for the extra knockout round.

I think I prefer a knockout round of 16; but, admittedly, that might make for more 'dead' matches. A knockout round of 32, with the top 4 from each group qualifying, would have less meaningless games - depending on how much importance the teams put on seeding/finishing 1st/2nd in their group.

 

That's the other good thing about the Swiss style. If you win your group you should get an easier path to the quarterfinals (on paper at least). Whereas when you have 12 groups of 4 it makes almost no difference if you finish first or second in your group, as we just witnessed in the past 2 Euros.

And also with the sixteen groups of 3 format, winning your group doesn't really help much either. Your path through the knockout stages is pretty much determined by the original draw.