The World Cup Is Bigger Than Just 32 Teams: Our view of FIFA’s biggest investment yet
The upcoming FIFA World Cup is shaping up to be one of the most talked‑about tournaments in living memory. It is not just the scale of the event that stands out, or the fact it is being hosted across three countries, but the way it forces football fans to ask a simple question: what is the World Cup actually for. Is it a tightly curated showcase of the same familiar powerhouses, or a celebration of a global game that grows when new nations, new cultures and new fans are allowed to take centre stage.
In a recent episode of The Business of Football podcast, host David wrestles with that question from the perspective of a lifelong fan. He does not approach the tournament as a pundit laying out tactical breakdowns or a business analyst running spreadsheets, but as someone who has watched every World Cup since 2010 and who still feels that familiar surge of excitement when the draw is made and the fixtures are set. Underneath that fan’s joy, however, is a more serious point about how the expansion of the tournament and the inclusion of smaller nations is changing the game in ways that go well beyond the ninety‑minute matches.
One of the most repeated lines in the pre‑tournament discourse is that the World Cup should stay frozen at 32 teams, that anything more risks diluting the quality. David pushes back against that idea with a straightforward argument. If you want smaller nations to get better at football you have to let them experience the World Cup first. Seeing your country on that stage is not just about bragging rights, it is about inspiring the next generation of young players, putting pressure on local governments to invest in pitches, academies and coaching, and gradually rebuilding the entire football ecosystem from the bottom up. When kids in a country that has never qualified see their national team on the same pitch as Brazil or France they are more likely to believe that they, too, can play at the highest level. That belief is the first building block of genuine football development.
The United States, Mexico and Canada’s shared hosting of the 2026 World Cup adds another layer to this conversation. The US already has a strong infrastructure of stadiums built for other sports, many of which can be repurposed for football. This is different to previous tournaments where entire new stadiums were constructed only to sit half‑empty in the years that followed. The fact that American football does not need to start building new arenas from scratch is a significant advantage, one that reduces the risk of the kind of stadium wastelands seen in Brazil after the 2014 World Cup. It also means that the focus can shift from bricks and mortar to the more lasting parts of the game: the leagues, the academies, the access to the ball at the grassroots level.
David makes the point that America does not need the World Cup to prove football can work there. Soccer is already growing, supported by the MLS, by the presence of global stars, and by a fanbase that turns out in big numbers for club and international games. The real question is what happens after the final whistle blows and the confetti is swept away. The real success of the tournament will not be measured by whether the US wins the World Cup, but by whether the billions of dollars, the global attention, and the hype are used to build something more sustainable. Do local academies get better funding. Do youth leagues become more affordable and accessible. Do clubs feel they can keep investing in coaching, facilities and player development rather than relying on short‑term tournaments and one‑off events. If the World Cup is treated as a two‑month spectacle and then everything goes back to normal the opportunity is wasted. If it is used as a launchpad to build something stronger than before that is when the host nations actually win.
For David the World Cup is not just a competition, it is a development tool. When new nations qualify it does more than just add another team to the draw. It gives players role models, it gives parents a reason to take their children to training, it gives local media something to cover and it gives governments an incentive to invest. Over time, that investment can translate into better leagues, more professional players, and a richer football culture that spills out beyond the national team. The tournament becomes a catalyst for change rather than a one‑off celebration.
England’s perspective on the World Cup is more complicated. David admits that he is worried about the current England side, sensing that it lacks both the spark and the structure of the team that reached the Euro 2020 final. He argues that the 2020 squad was probably the best England team in living memory, with a generation of players all hitting form at the same time, and that the side preparing for 2026 is a step down in terms of cohesion and quality. The arrival of a new manager, the reshaping of the squad, and the pressure to perform on the biggest stage have turned the current era into a more uncertain one for England fans. The problem is not just about individual talent, but about how the national team system supports or fails to support that talent. A strong grassroots system and a deep pool of young players give England an advantage, but even that does not guarantee success when the pressure is highest.
For all the politics, the logistics and the business side of the tournament it is important to remember that the World Cup is, at its core, for the fans. David speaks about the joy of seeing new nations, new cultures and new fans lighting up the tournament for the first time. He talks about the energy of the Mexican wave in a stadium full of supporters who have waited a lifetime to watch their team on the world stage. He talks about the way smaller nations bring their own stories and their own histories to the event, turning the World Cup into a global festival rather than just a sporting competition. The tournament is not just about glory on the pitch, it is about the way football pulls people together, how it creates shared memories that last for decades.
As the 2026 World Cup approaches the conversation is shifting from who will win the trophy to what kind of football world the tournament will leave behind. Will smaller nations be given the chance to grow. Will the host countries use the event as a springboard to improve their football infrastructure. Will the global audience be reminded that the World Cup is not just about the traditional superpowers but about the entire planet that plays the game. For David the answer is that the World Cup must be seen as something bigger than 32 teams. It must be seen as a moment where the sport can expand, evolve and include more voices, more stories and more fans. The tournament is not just about who is on the pitch, it is about who is inspired by what they see there.
