2026 World Cup - News, Updates and discussions

[Free kick]

https://www.tsn.ca/soccer/fifa-expands-2026-world-cup-again-to-create-104-game-program-1.1931354

It’s frustrating that they make this announcement that we all knew was coming and yet they say nothing about the split of games in each country.   That’s what we all want to know.  Recall,  under the original proposal,  there was supposed to be 80 games of which 60 were to be played in the US and 10 each for Mex and Can.  But what is the new split now that its 104 games instead of 80 games?   Is it 12 games in Canada?  13?.  10? Who knows.  

Edited March 14, 2023 by Free kick

[Shway]

7 minutes ago, Free kick said:

https://www.tsn.ca/soccer/fifa-expands-2026-world-cup-again-to-create-104-game-program-1.1931354

It’s frustrating that they make this announcement that we all knew was coming and yet they say nothing about the split of games in each country.   That’s what we all want to know.  Recall,  under the original proposal,  there was supposed to be 80 games of which 60 were to be played in the US and 10 each for Mex and Can.  But what is the new split now that its 104 games instead of 80 games?   Is it 12 games in Canada?  13?.  10? Who knows.  

Expect 10 Canada, 10 Mexico, and 84 USA. 

We are only pawns.

[Obinna]

24 minutes ago, Shway said:

Expect 10 Canada, 10 Mexico, and 84 USA. 

We are only pawns.

It sucks, but I get why we are pawns. Our stadia are junk, and we lack the know-how to rectify that situation. Chalk it up to politics, red tape, a lack of appetite from the public to spend on sporting infrastructure, or all of the above, but either way the situation is dismal unless.... it's a hockey stadium. 

What I find more interesting is the usage of Mexico as a pawn. They've hosted before and they are a soccer mad country with a big population and plenty of suitable venues. Questions about safety? Consider that South Africa hosted a little of a decade ago. The USA can host this all on their own, so they don't even need Mexico, but I just find it strange Mexico is getting a "Canada" level of disrespect, despite having way more going for it than we do. 

If we split things by population alone, it would be something like USA 74 games, Mexico 26 games, Canada 8 games.  

[narduch]

20 minutes ago, Obinna said:

It sucks, but I get why we are pawns. Our stadia are junk,

 

You could almost argue based on our stadiums we do not even deserve to co-host at all.

BMO Field is a joke for a World Cup stadium.

And I have a bad feeling about how well real grass will hold at BC Place.

Edited March 14, 2023 by narduch

[RJB]

2 hours ago, kacbru said:

How about we wait until we show we're capable of getting a result at a WC before we start complaining about all of these scrub teams that will be joining.

We are one of the teams that doesn't deserve to be in a knockout match. 32 teams will.male it, so that would include us.

[RJB]

2 hours ago, Approve My Account Pls said:

Thinking of a few off the top of my head I'd think: Italy, Russia, Columbia, Chile, Scotland, Sweden, Norway, Turkey, Nigeria, Algeria, Egypt, you can definitely make an argument for a couple more

So overall I'd argue that the additional European, South American, and African teams are at the very least the same level as most 2022 pot 3/4 teams. It's with Asia, Concacaf, and I guess Oceania that I think we see the biggest drop in quality

Meh. None of those teams were missed.  And honestly, some of them you've listed actually prove my point. Scotland is not good enough, and they don't belong in a world cup. Same with Turkey, and Norway.  Remember that you only listed 11 teams. You can add el Salvador, panama, Venezuela, New Zealand, and still we need another. Those teams just don't deserve right now. 

The tournament is less compelling with more teams, and there has already been a good cycling to teams qualifying; only a handful have made every tournament at 32 teams. 

 

[Obinna]

2 minutes ago, narduch said:

You could almost argue bases on our stadiums we do not even deserve to co-host at all.

BMO Field is a joke for a World Cup stadium.

And I have a bad feeling about how well real grass will hold at BC Place.

You get a Thanks from me, because it's absolutely true and exactly what I was getting at.

Toronto alone could (and probably should) have an 70-80K NFL sized stadium, and that's in addition to BMO field and the Skydome. I am actually surprised there is no NFL team in Toronto, but that's for another topic...

I don't ever see Montreal being in the market for an NFL team, but seriously get the Big O situation figured out. How many years has it been? It's pathetic. I realize that no team means no stadium, but just look where the CFL team plays. This is a metro area of 4 million people, on par with cities with cities like Boston or Detroit, and there's nowhere better for that team to play? Nobody saw the opportunity to build a 50K seat stadium that could be used for the CFL team afterwards? It's mind boggling. 

Vancouver has a good situation; hence they are hosting games. Can say nothing bad about their stadiums. 50K stadium being used by CFL and MLS. Perfectly on par for a city of its size. 

Calgary is an absolute joke. McMahon stadium is an embarrassment. Keep it for the University of Calgary, but for the love of god, get something decent built. They've been trying for years and something dumb always seems to get in the way. Same with the Saddledome. City of 1.5 million people, same size as Ottawa, and really should have (at minimum) something like what Ottawa has. With a popular CFL team, however, there's no reason why a 35-40K stadium doesn't exist. 

Which brings me to Ottawa. Like Vancouver, the situation there is acceptable.  

Edmonton? Adequate situation but could be updated. Oh, and there really should have something smaller for CPL. Not really on topic to discuss that here, though.

Hamilton is fine, Winnipeg is fine, Quebec City is arguably slacking. Regina is doing exceedingly well, given its population. Saskatoon is working on a CPL stadium, and close enough to Regina so doesn't really factor in. The half-a-mil cities in Southern Ontario, Kitchener and London, are not going to be realistically hosting anything close to this magnitude, ever. Ditto Halifax (probably). 

I know we will never be the USA when it comes to Stadiums, but we can do a hell of a lot better.

 

End rant.  

 

[Kadenge]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

You could almost argue based on our stadiums we do not even deserve to co-host at all.

BMO Field is a joke for a World Cup stadium.

And I have a bad feeling about how well real grass will hold at BC Place.

the sad part about this is that the Millions that is budgeted for additional seating at BMO for the WC is "apparently" going towards temporary seating. I really hope this is not true as it would be a lost opportunity to permanently increase stadium capacity in Canada's largest city

[Obinna]

11 minutes ago, Kadenge said:

the sad part about this is that the Millions that is budgeted for additional seating at BMO for the WC is "apparently" going towards temporary seating. I really hope this is not true as it would be a lost opportunity to permanently increase stadium capacity in Canada's largest city

I don't mean to turn this into a bitching fest, but I never understood why they chose to go temporary. Makes no sense to me. Why not do another round of expansion and grow BMO to 45K? Some of the most successful MLS franchises like Vancouver, Seattle and Atlanta play in oversized stadiums. TFC consistently bring in decent attendance numbers, and their model (love it or hate it) is to overpay for World superstars, so there's always potential for a big draw, no? To be honest, I think 45k is selling themselves short. They should have gone for 50K. Toronto are a big market team and should have a big market stadium. BMO at 30k is fine, nothing wrong with it, but they are missing the opportunity (and excuse) to expand once again. It's literally the best excuse to expand that I can think of. Shame they are going temp...

And yes I am making an intentional dig at Vancouver here  It's all love though!

Edited March 15, 2023 by Obinna

[An Observer]

2 hours ago, RJB said:

We are one of the teams that doesn't deserve to be in a knockout match. 32 teams will.male it, so that would include us.

From a Canada perspective I like it.  It now means that we are guaranteed 3 matches in the group and as one of the hosts, we can expect a decent team from pot 2 but definitely beatable sides fro pot 3 and 4 which means there is a good chance of us finishing 1 or 2 in our group especially as we are playing at home.  If we finish 1, there is a decent chance of us beating a 2 or 3 from another group and getting into the round of 16.   This means there is a very good chance we will play 4 or 5 matches.  I don’t think that will be tedious for Canadian fans or the nation.  

I do think the expansion to 48 with groups of 4 moves the tournament vibe to somewhere between the previous 32 tournament and 64 in march madness.  I suspect interest in the major footballing countries may cool a bit for the group stage but will build once the knockout starts in the round of 32.  For the bulk of the countries, it will mean much greater interest in the initial group phase overall as more countries fans will follow it closely as they have a hope of progressing and that will carry through into the knock out rounds even if they go out.  So I think overall it will produce much greater interest and money even if some of the support in the traditional countries may suffer a bit at least in the initial group stage.  And like March madness, there will be upsets in the group but also the round of 32 which will generate a lot of interest.

[Shway]

I agree with you @Obinnabut every time I’m at BMO I think about how uninspiring it is because of the lack of vision. 

It’s a stadium pieced together with a severe lack of planning, it sums up the city. So yes permanently bigger would be “great”….but not the way they plan for it to be.

It’s just stupid

[archer21]

AGR tweeted that the previous agreement was 4 round robin matches in each of Toronto and Vancouver, then 2 round of 32 matches in Vancouver. Was that confirmed?

[cornerkick]

With today's announcement, could Edmonton be back as a possible host city?  There would be a conflict with CFL, but that also exists with Vancouver and Toronto. 

[Obinna]

Thought I just had: 

Perhaps the temp seating in Toronto had more to do with making sure the city had a "viable" stadium than anything else. Toronto had to be a host city so long as Canada was hosting, so they had to check off the "stadium" requirement immediately. They couldn't wait for expansion or new stadium plans to be put together. As @Shwaypoints out, BMO was put together in phases and the planning was somewhat incoherent. This makes permanent expansion tricky, perhaps - not something which can be rushed into given the groundwork laid previously.

But now with Toronto secured they are not under the gun, so couldn't they now try and work something out more permanent? I doubt it happens and temp is what I expect and what was agreed to, but surely there's nothing stopping MLSE and/or the city of Toronto from drafting up and executing some permanent expansion plans, right? I can't help but think of the missed chance to leave a legacy post world cup, instead of tearing down the temp stands and leaving no trace the World Cup even happened in Toronto. 

 

[dyslexic nam]

13 hours ago, cornerkick said:

With today's announcement, could Edmonton be back as a possible host city?  There would be a conflict with CFL, but that also exists with Vancouver and Toronto. 

I am no expect on CFL but couldn’t the WC be an opportunity for CFL to utilize alternative venues across the country in an effort to promote the league.  I know (or at least think) they hosted a game in Halifax not that long ago - why not do the same thing with a few other locations to drum up some interest?  

Maybe CFL is already saturated in markets that matter but it would be one way to resolve any scheduling conflicts.  

[dyslexic nam]

1 hour ago, Obinna said:

Thought I just had: 

Perhaps the temp seating in Toronto had more to do with making sure the city had a "viable" stadium than anything else. Toronto had to be a host city so long as Canada was hosting, so they had to check off the "stadium" requirement immediately. They couldn't wait for expansion or new stadium plans to be put together. As @Shwaypoints out, BMO was put together in phases and the planning was somewhat incoherent. This makes permanent expansion tricky, perhaps - not something which can be rushed into given the groundwork laid previously.

But now with Toronto secured they are not under the gun, so couldn't they now try and work something out more permanent? I doubt it happens and temp is what I expect and what was agreed to, but surely there's nothing stopping MLSE and/or the city of Toronto from drafting up and executing some permanent expansion plans, right? I can't help but think of the missed chance to leave a legacy post world cup, instead of tearing down the temp stands and leaving no trace the World Cup even happened in Toronto. 

 

Even a mix of permanent (modest permanent expansion) and temporary (crank it up for the WC) would be better than all temporary construction.   While some in other areas may not love it, Toronto is the defacto home of our national team, it is the biggest market in the country by a wide margin, and it is the home filed for our country’s biggest club team.    At a time when footy popularity is on the rise, it seems like the “iron is hot” for a quantum step in terms of capacity.   

Edited March 15, 2023 by dyslexic nam

[Obinna]

58 minutes ago, dyslexic nam said:

Even a mix of permanent (modest permanent expansion) and temporary (crank it up for the WC) would be better than all temporary construction.   While some in other areas may not love it, Toronto is the defacto home of our national team, it is the biggest market in the country by a wide margin, and it is the home filed for our country’s biggest club team.    At a time when footy popularity is on the rise, it seems like the “iron is hot” for a quantum step in terms of capacity.   

That's a good point. I would even be happy with a temp capacity of 60K and a permanent structure of 40K - though even this is short of where I think Toronto's ambition should be. Given how TFC wants to be portrayed, which is one of the giants of the league, shouldn't they be playing in a stadium that holds at least 40K? And if they plan to get to that capacity eventually, why not do so now, when you can possibly leverage the World Cup situation? 

[cornerkick]

7 hours ago, dyslexic nam said:

I am no expect on CFL but couldn’t the WC be an opportunity for CFL to utilize alternative venues across the country in an effort to promote the league.  I know (or at least think) they hosted a game in Halifax not that long ago - why not do the same thing with a few other locations to drum up some interest?  

Maybe CFL is already saturated in markets that matter but it would be one way to resolve any scheduling conflicts.  

I could see the Bc lions playing a few games in Kelowna or Kamloops.  I think they hold preseason camp there.  

[Free kick]

8 hours ago, Obinna said:

Thought I just had: 

Perhaps the temp seating in Toronto had more to do with making sure the city had a "viable" stadium than anything else. Toronto had to be a host city so long as Canada was hosting, so they had to check off the "stadium" requirement immediately. They couldn't wait for expansion or new stadium plans to be put together. As @Shwaypoints out, BMO was put together in phases and the planning was somewhat incoherent. This makes permanent expansion tricky, perhaps - not something which can be rushed into given the groundwork laid previously.

But now with Toronto secured they are not under the gun, so couldn't they now try and work something out more permanent? I doubt it happens and temp is what I expect and what was agreed to, but surely there's nothing stopping MLSE and/or the city of Toronto from drafting up and executing some permanent expansion plans, right? I can't help but think of the missed chance to leave a legacy post world cup, instead of tearing down the temp stands and leaving no trace the World Cup even happened in Toronto. 

 

Regarding the bolded part.   If they were to do that, then it could be interpreted in many different way be FIFA.   For example,  every indications leading up to section of world cup hosts was that Nashville was lock to be a host and then (days/weeks before the announcement) they opted to build a brand new stadium for 2026; for the NFL team.   That, in essence, is what eliminated them as a host because the bidding and evaluation had been done with Nissan stadium as the venue.   So basically,  if you change the terms of what you put in the bid,  they could slap you in the wrist.   

The flip side of that is that is the decision to go permanent seating expansion could be viewed as not that significant of a change to FIFA to warrant action on their part.  

Edited March 15, 2023 by Free kick

[Free kick]

This bit of news is not entirely related to the 2026 WC but it is a huge story none the less.

Club World Cup: European clubs back FIFA's plans for expansion (yahoo.com)

Highlights:

• European Club Association (ECA) has now endorsed the the new 32-team Club WC that would feature 12 European teams and be played every four years from June 2025. 

 

• Also approved: FIFA's plans to introduce an annual match between the Champions League winners and the team which wins an intercontinental play-off tournament and a Women's Club World Cup.

 

• The new international match calendar (that I posted in another thread a few weeks ago) has also been approved 

 

• FIFA set to pay clubs record £290m for sending their players to the World Cup in 2026 with a 75 per cent rise from Qatar... as the tournament expands to 48 teams and 104 games.  Fifa agrees to pay clubs extra £119m to release players for men’s World Cup | Fifa | The Guardian

 

 

FIFA signs renewed Memorandum of Understanding with ECA

Edited March 28, 2023 by Free kick

[Free kick]

WCQ 2026 start and End dates

 

[narduch]

Toronto bid gets scrutinized in the media 

 

 

[Ansem]

19 minutes ago, narduch said:

Toronto bid gets scrutinized in the media 

 

 

Tory who was a Rogers paid employee got this deal done while imposing austerity on the city. This should definitely be scrutinized.

Has Westhead said anything about this, oh right - CSB is the evil greedy beast that needs to be slain

[narduch]

Just now, Ansem said:

Tory who was a Rogers paid employee got this deal done while imposing austerity on the city. This should definitely be scrutinized.

Has Westhead said anything about this, oh right - CSB is the evil greedy beast that needs to be slain

Tory was also banging one of the MLSE staffers that was working on the deal

[RS]

14 minutes ago, Ansem said:

Has Westhead said anything about this, oh right - CSB is the evil greedy beast that needs to be slain

Westhead lives rent-free in far too many people's heads on this board.