- The Beautiful Game’s Biggest Gamble: Inside FIFA’s 64-Team World Cup Proposal
More Teams, More Money, More
Barely 48 hours after Spain lifted the FIFA World Cup trophy at MetLife Stadium, football’s attention has already shifted from celebrating a historic tournament to debating an even bigger future.
FIFA President Gianni Infantino has confirmed that football’s governing body is prepared to examine the possibility of expanding the men’s World Cup to 64 teams, a proposal that could fundamentally reshape the sport’s biggest competition and spark one of the most consequential debates in modern football.
The discussion comes immediately after the successful conclusion of the first-ever 48-team World Cup, a tournament that featured 104 matches across the United States, Canada and Mexico and shattered numerous attendance, financial and sporting records. Yet even before analysts have fully assessed the impact of that expansion, FIFA is already contemplating another leap that could push the competition into entirely new territory.
A 64-team World Cup would not simply add another 16 nations. If FIFA retained the current format of 16 groups of four followed by a 32-team knockout phase, the tournament would balloon to 128 matches—24 more than the 2026 edition and exactly double the 64 games played under the traditional 32-team format that existed from France 1998 to Qatar 2022.
Such an expansion would almost certainly stretch the competition beyond its current five-week schedule, requiring additional stadiums, training centres, hotels, transport systems and volunteers. It would also intensify an already packed international football calendar, raising fresh concerns over player welfare and fixture congestion.
For FIFA, however, the attraction extends far beyond the football pitch.
A larger tournament would bring more television rights, sponsorship opportunities, ticket sales and commercial partnerships, strengthening FIFA’s position as the sport’s most powerful financial institution. By allowing more countries to qualify automatically, the World Cup itself could become even more valuable while reducing the commercial importance of continental qualifying competitions organised by regional confederations.
That shift could dramatically alter football’s financial landscape.
Many analysts believe qualifying campaigns currently generate significant broadcasting and sponsorship revenue for continental bodies such as UEFA, CONMEBOL, CAF and the Asian Football Confederation. If qualification becomes considerably easier under a 64-team format, broadcasters may place less value on qualifiers, potentially making those confederations increasingly dependent on FIFA’s financial distributions.
It is one of the reasons several influential football leaders have openly opposed the proposal.
UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin has repeatedly argued that another expansion would weaken both the World Cup and Europe’s qualifying competitions, insisting the current 48-team format already provides sufficient opportunities for emerging nations.
Asian Football Confederation President Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa has expressed similar reservations, questioning where the expansion would ultimately end if FIFA continues increasing the number of participating teams.
Infantino, however, continues to defend the concept from a global development perspective.
The FIFA president believes expanding the World Cup allows more nations to experience football’s biggest stage, particularly countries outside Europe and South America that have historically found qualification extremely difficult.
According to Infantino, giving smaller football nations realistic opportunities to qualify creates stronger incentives to invest in youth development, coaching, infrastructure and domestic competitions.
Supporters of expansion point to the recently concluded 2026 tournament as evidence.
The increase from 32 to 48 teams gave debutants and smaller football nations unprecedented opportunities to compete alongside the world’s elite. Countries such as Curaçao reached the World Cup for the first time, while Cape Verde became the smallest nation by population ever to qualify for the knockout stages. Several traditional outsiders also demonstrated that the competitive gap between football’s established powers and emerging nations is gradually narrowing.
Financially, the tournament was also an overwhelming success.
FIFA distributed a record prize fund exceeding one billion dollars, with every participating nation guaranteed at least $12.5 million, while champions Spain earned more than $50 million in prize money. Stadiums attracted millions of supporters throughout North America, broadcasters reported record television audiences in several countries, and commercial partnerships reached unprecedented levels.
Those achievements have strengthened FIFA’s confidence that an even larger World Cup could generate greater revenues while accelerating football’s global growth.
Yet the success of the 48-team format has not silenced critics.
Many football observers argue that the traditional 32-team World Cup represented the perfect competitive balance.
From France 1998 through Qatar 2022, qualification remained one of international football’s toughest challenges. Every group contained elite opposition, and nearly every match carried enormous significance. Simply reaching the tournament was considered a major achievement, preserving the prestige and exclusivity that made the World Cup unique.
The 48-team edition altered that landscape.
Although it produced unforgettable stories, including Spain’s title triumph, Lionel Messi’s emotional farewell and Kylian Mbappe’s record-breaking Golden Boot campaign, statistical analysis revealed a wider competitive gap than previous tournaments. Football analysts noted that the average difference in FIFA rankings between opposing teams reached its highest level in World Cup history, contributing to several one-sided group-stage contests.
Data from the tournament also showed that higher-ranked nations won more than two-thirds of their matches, while genuine upsets remained relatively rare despite the larger field.
Supporters of expansion counter that every World Cup has produced mismatches regardless of format and argue that emerging nations improve only by competing regularly against stronger opposition.
History appears to support that argument.
When the tournament expanded from 24 teams to 32 in 1998, similar concerns were raised about declining standards. Instead, nations such as Senegal, South Korea, Ghana, Costa Rica, Morocco and Croatia later emerged as genuine World Cup contenders after benefiting from increased exposure on football’s biggest stage.
Whether the same long-term effect occurs under the 48-team format remains to be seen.
The logistical questions surrounding a 64-team World Cup are perhaps even more daunting.
The 2030 tournament will already be spread across Morocco, Spain and Portugal, with opening matches in Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay to celebrate the competition’s centenary. Accommodating 64 teams across six host nations would significantly increase travel demands for players, officials and supporters.
The challenge could become even greater in 2034, when Saudi Arabia is scheduled to host the tournament alone. Construction is already underway on 15 proposed venues for the existing 48-team format, but adding another 16 teams would require additional stadiums, hotels, transport infrastructure and training facilities.
Timing also presents another major obstacle.
Ramadan is expected to begin in November 2034, making it difficult to stage the tournament during the same November-December window used for Qatar 2022. A longer competition could force FIFA into another major reshaping of the global football calendar, affecting domestic leagues across Europe, Asia and North America.
Player welfare remains another central concern.
Modern footballers already face increasingly demanding schedules that include domestic leagues, continental club competitions, international qualifiers, Nations League fixtures, Club World Cups and expanded continental championships.
A 64-team World Cup could add further physical strain on elite players while increasing travel demands across multiple host cities and countries.
For now, FIFA insists that no decision has been taken.
The proposal remains under discussion, with football’s governing body expected to evaluate the sporting, financial and logistical impact of the inaugural 48-team tournament before determining whether another expansion is realistic.
What is certain is that football finds itself at another defining crossroads.
For nearly three decades, the 32-team World Cup delivered some of the sport’s greatest moments. The expanded 48-team edition has now demonstrated that growth can bring fresh stories, new heroes and record-breaking commercial success.
Whether the future belongs to 64 teams will depend on one delicate question: can football continue expanding without losing the exclusivity, competitiveness and magic that have made the FIFA World Cup the most celebrated sporting event on the planet?
