More money, more teams, more problems
FIFA just announced a $655 million prize pool for the 2026 World Cup, a 50% bump from Qatar 2022. Sounds impressive until you realize they've also crammed in 48 teams instead of 32. That's not growth, that's inflation disguised as progress. The winner gets $50 million, the runner-up pockets $33 million, and even the teams finishing dead last walk away with $9 million. But here's what FIFA won't tell you: more participants doesn't make the tournament better, it makes it longer and less competitive.
Let me be blunt. The 32-team format was perfect. You had genuine jeopardy in the group stage, every match mattered, and getting out of the groups meant something. Now we're getting 48 teams, which means 16 third-place teams advancing to the knockouts. That's absurd. You can literally lose twice in the group stage and still make it through. Where's the sporting merit in that?
The money doesn't trickle down like FIFA claims
FIFA loves to position itself as football's benevolent guardian, spreading wealth to develop the game globally. But let's look at what this money actually does. A nation finishing 33rd to 48th gets $9 million plus $1.5 million in prep costs. That's $10.5 million guaranteed. Sounds decent until you remember that's split between federations, coaching staff, player bonuses, and administrative costs. How much actually goes into grassroots development? A fraction.
Compare that to what top clubs pay. Manchester City's wage bill alone is over $350 million per season. PSG just handed Mbappé a signing bonus bigger than what most World Cup participants will earn. The financial gap between club and international football is massive, and this prize money doesn't close it. It just creates the illusion of equity.
The USA-Canada-Mexico logistics will be a nightmare
Hosting across three countries sounds grand on paper, but the practical reality is going to be chaos. Teams flying between time zones for group stage matches, fans unable to follow their nations because matches are thousands of miles apart, and a tournament that drags on for weeks because you need recovery time built into the schedule. This isn't about creating a global spectacle, it's about maximizing revenue across North American markets.
The 2022 World Cup in Qatar had its issues—human rights abuses, sportswashing, the works—but at least the compact geography meant fans could attend multiple matches in a day. In 2026, you'll need a flight between Vancouver and Mexico City to follow your team. That's not accessible, that's exclusive.
Who actually benefits from expansion?
The blunt answer: nations that have no business being at a World Cup finals. I'm not being cruel, I'm being realistic. The gap between elite international sides and mid-tier nations is enormous. We're going to see 5-0 and 6-0 thrashings in the group stage that serve no competitive purpose. You think fans want to watch San Marino or Gibraltar (if they somehow qualify) get demolished by France or Brazil? That's not entertainment, that's a waste of everyone's time.
The counterargument is always about giving smaller nations experience. Fine. But that experience comes at the cost of competitive integrity. The World Cup should be the pinnacle, where only the best compete. It shouldn't be a participation trophy tournament where showing up gets you eight figures.
What this means for the tournament's quality
More teams means more matches, which means more fatigue, which means worse football in the knockout rounds. The players who actually matter—the ones dragging their nations through the tournament—will be running on empty by the semifinals. Meanwhile, FIFA gets to sell more broadcast rights, more sponsorships, and more tickets. The financial model works perfectly for them. For the sport? Not so much.
And let's talk about the money distribution. The winner gets $50 million, which is substantial. But Argentina won in 2022 and pocketed $42 million. Did that windfall transform Argentine football? No. Messi's still at Inter Miami, their domestic league is still chaotic, and the real development happens at club level. This prize money is a nice bonus, it's not changing the sport's trajectory.
The bottom line
FIFA's $655 million prize pool is a marketing exercise. It sounds enormous, it generates headlines, and it lets Gianni Infantino stand on stage and talk about growing the game. But the 48-team format is a mistake. It dilutes quality, extends an already long tournament, and creates logistical headaches that serve FIFA's balance sheet more than the sport. The money's nice, but it doesn't fix the fundamental problem: we're getting a worse World Cup so FIFA can make more cash. That's not progress. That's just business.
