For nearly three decades, the FIFA World Cup followed a familiar formula: 32 teams, 8 groups and a relatively straightforward path to the knockout stage. In 2026, FIFA tore up that format and expanded the tournament to 48 teams for the first time in World Cup history.
The thinking behind the change was easy to understand. More teams meant more countries represented, more fans involved and more nations getting the chance to experience football’s biggest stage. It also meant more matches, a new Round of 32 and a significantly longer tournament.
Not everyone was convinced. Critics feared the expansion would dilute the quality of the competition, create more one-sided matches and make an already demanding event feel bloated. There were also questions about whether the new format would add genuine drama or simply generate more games and more revenue for FIFA.
Now that we have seen the 48-team format in action, the answer is not completely clear-cut. The expanded World Cup has created new opportunities and compelling storylines that would not have existed under the old system, but it has also introduced some obvious drawbacks.
So, did adding 16 more teams actually make the World Cup better? Here is a closer look at the strongest arguments on both sides.
The Good
Love it or hate it, the 48-team format has made for an exciting World Cup so far. Here are three of the biggest reasons why the expanded tournament has been a success.
A More Inclusive World Cup
Perhaps the strongest argument in favour of the 48-team format is that the World Cup finally feels more like a true world championship. The expanded field opened the door for nations like Curaçao, Jordan and Uzbekistan to make their tournament debuts, while Haiti returned to the competition for the first time since 1974. Uzbekistan also became the first Central Asian nation to qualify.
For those countries, simply reaching the World Cup was a historic achievement. It gave new generations of players and supporters the chance to experience football’s biggest event and made the tournament more reflective of the game’s genuinely global reach.
Fresh Faces, Fresh Storylines
The expanded field has also produced storylines that simply wouldn’t have existed under the old 32-team format. Cape Verde captured hearts with a remarkable debut tournament, while Norway ended a 28-year World Cup absence by reaching the quarter-finals. Paraguay knocked out Germany in one of the tournament’s biggest shocks, and Morocco once again proved its 2022 success was no fluke with another deep run. These are exactly the kinds of stories that make the World Cup special.
Instead of seeing the same handful of football powers dominate the conversation, fans have been treated to new heroes, unexpected contenders and memorable moments from nations that rarely get this kind of spotlight. That’s the beauty of an expanded tournament; it creates more opportunities for the next great World Cup story to emerge.
A Bigger Party for Football Fans
For supporters, the biggest selling point is simple: more World Cup football. The expanded tournament increased the schedule from 64 matches to 104, extending the competition by nearly two weeks and giving fans more opportunities to watch their favourite teams, discover new ones and enjoy meaningful football throughout the summer.
The added matches have also meant more memorable moments. From dramatic penalty shootouts and giant-killing upsets to emerging stars announcing themselves on the world stage, the tournament has rarely lacked entertainment. For fans, it’s been less about “too much football” and more about having more reasons to tune in every day.
The Bad
For all the positives, the expanded World Cup has also sparked plenty of criticism. Here are three of the biggest concerns surrounding the new format.
Qualification Is Less Exclusive
One of the things that made the World Cup special was how difficult it was to get there. For many nations, simply qualifying felt like a trophy in itself. With the field expanding from 32 to 48 teams, some critics argue that reaching football’s biggest tournament no longer carries the same prestige.
That concern has been echoed by several figures within the game. During the tournament, Ghana coach Carlos Queiroz questioned whether expansion had devalued the World Cup by making qualification easier. Even with 48 spots available, nearly one in four FIFA member associations now qualify for the finals. Whether that’s greater inclusivity or reduced exclusivity ultimately depends on your perspective.
Too Many One-Sided Matches
While the expanded field has created more opportunities, it has also increased the gap between the tournament’s strongest and weakest teams. One of the biggest concerns heading into 2026 was that adding 16 more nations would lead to more lopsided contests, and at times, those fears have been justified – just look at Canada’s 6-0 thrashing over Qatar.
Only 51.9% of group-stage matches were decided by a draw or a single goal, the lowest rate since 1982. At the same time, 27.3% were decided by three goals or more, more than double the rate seen at the 2022 World Cup. Eight teams also finished the group stage with a goal difference of -5 or worse, the highest total in more than four decades.
Player Fatigue and Injury Risk
An expanded World Cup doesn’t just mean more football for fans; it also puts greater physical demands on the players. The tournament has grown from 64 matches to 104, extending the schedule and increasing the workload for athletes who are already coming off long seasons on the pitch.
Player welfare has remained a major talking point throughout the 2026 World Cup, with concerns over heat, travel demands and the cumulative toll of an increasingly crowded football calendar. Critics argue that while fans may enjoy the extra matches, the players are ultimately the ones paying the price.
The Bottom Line
The expanded format has introduced new footballing nations to the world and given fans more matches to enjoy, but it has also raised valid questions about match quality, player welfare and whether qualifying for the tournament still carries the same prestige.
No format is ever going to please everyone. But if the goal was to make the World Cup feel bigger, more inclusive and more global, it’s difficult to argue that the first 48-team edition hasn’t largely succeeded.
The challenge now is finding the right balance between expansion and preserving what makes the World Cup special.