World Cup 2026

[Billy Hoyle]

I was part of a group of 10 that went to a sports bar for the game. We got there 2 hours early to stake out a spot ... and good thing, because the place was packed by game time. It was a big joint and there musta been 500 people in there.

I'm not really a soccer guy but I loved the energy in the crowd, which was decidedly pro-Spain. Full course of boos when the FIFA guy's guest was shown on the screen, but otherwise lots of cheering every time Spain advanced.

The crowd went wild when Spain scored the first goal, only to moan when it was waved off. When they finally scored the goal that counted, I can't imagine the place had been any louder during the Seahawks' Super Bowl win.

All in all, really glad I went. A fun, festive atmosphere.

The George and Dragon? I remember them opening up at 4am during the 2006 World Cup. It was THE Seattle soccer bar for so long.

Watched it with my in-laws. My SIL hates Argentina because of Milei (everything decision she makes rooted in partisan politics), but when I joked how a house full of Filipinos was rooting for their colonizer, everyone laughed, and the SIL changed the subject to Singapore and England colonizing them.

Also, Martinez should have gotten the Gold Glove for his performance yesterday alone. He had more saves yesterday than Simon faced shots throughout the entire tournament.

[MU82]

No, the Gantry, right by Climate Pledge Arena. It actually was our third choice - we started at Queen Anne Beerhall and then tried Tom's, but had to abandon each when we discovered there wasn't enough room for our party. We were walking somewhere else in the area but saw the Gantry had no lines. That's because it hadn't officially opened for the day yet, but they were just starting to let people inside anyway. Turned out to be a great choice. I've always enjoyed watching big sporting events in establishments like this - next best thing to being at the game!

[JWags85]

I feel like I'm shaking my fist at the sky here, but have top strikers always been this detached from the flow of play?  I don't mean to old man this, but watching Haaland and Messi be nonfactors in close losses while they wait for service is really tough. I understand that when you have prolific scorers (especially as large as Haaland or as old as Messi) you can't waste them chasing play. But to some extent, what is the point of being called one of the best players in the world if you're a completely dependent variable who can't influence the biggest game you'll ever play?

Messi gets a pass because I think we saw his age as much as anything, and he has a ton of receipts from earlier in his career.  But once Argentina went down to 10 yesterday, they would have almost been better served taking him off - they were really playing 9.5 v 11 from that point forward.  I'm not saying they should have or dumb enough to suggest you can actually take Messi off in a WC final, but he was exclusively a set piece taker from that point on.

I think its a unique situation with those two.  Pakuni covered Messi pretty well, but Haaland is an interesting case cause what you talked about gets discussed pretty regularly in both EPL discourse, but also in discussions of where Haaland ranks in the world's best. 

He's not super technically gifted or a great dribbler, not an exceptional passer, he needs service to be effective.  His greatness is almost entirely down to his exceptional athletic gifts/size and his instincts/feel for chances which leads to his otherworldly, almost freakish, ability to finish almost every chance, no matter how ugly.  You watch other amazing prolific strikers recently like Zlatan, Suarez, Kane, Lewandoski, etc...and their reels are full of crazy strikes and defense baffling moves.  Haaland has some thunderbolts, sure, but equal amounts are him clattering into a cross or loose ball and finishing into the net with his thigh, knee, shoulder, etc...  So if he's not getting service or there isn't good build up play, then he's not going to be as impactful.  That's kind of the small knock on his greatness thus far at 25.  He never played on a team that wasn't very good and very high scoring without/before.  RB Salzburg, Dortmund, and City were all explosive juggernauts that became even more insane with his ability.

But also, I think you picked one fair example in Haaland but Messi isn't even a striker.  He's always been more of an attacking midfielder (hence his number 10), occasionally an 11 as additional forward or floating wing depending on the lineup.  But the other really good 9s (strikers) haven't been necessarily detached.  Kane is a pretty pure 9, but he drops back an awful lot when needed and almost becomes a false 9.  Oyarzabal was Spain's leading scorer and while he plays more of a 10/11 attacking midfielder role with Real Sociedad, Spain played him up top as a striker all tournament.  Whether tactically or due to his habits with Sociedad, he definitely was deeply involved in the flow of play.

[Pakuni]

F--- and no.

Alejandro Dominguez, the president of South American soccer's ruling body Conmebol, has doubled down on his desire for the 2030 World Cup to be expanded to 64 teams.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7460417/2026/07/21/world-cup-64-teams-2030-dominguez/

[Its DJOver]

F--- and no.

Alejandro Dominguez, the president of South American soccer's ruling body Conmebol, has doubled down on his desire for the 2030 World Cup to be expanded to 64 teams.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7460417/2026/07/21/world-cup-64-teams-2030-dominguez/

Eh, this WC kinda changed my mind about that. I'm sure it wouldn't break down exactly in line with FIFA rankings, especially depending on how the extra spots get divided by confederation, but you look at the top 16 teams that weren't there and it doesn't really water down the competition all that much. Would not be a huge price to pay to avoid third place group stage teams advancing. I also have the self awareness to understand that I really, really don't like third place group stage teams advancing so that could/is skewing my perspective.

[Pakuni]

Eh, this WC kinda changed my mind about that. I'm sure it wouldn't break down exactly in line with FIFA rankings, especially depending on how the extra spots get divided by confederation, but you look at the top 16 teams that weren't there and it doesn't really water down the competition all that much. Would not be a huge price to pay to avoid third place group stage teams advancing. I also have the self awareness to understand that I really, really don't like third place group stage teams advancing so that could/is skewing my perspective.

Also not a fan of third-place group stage teams advancing, but all this does is make it more likely teams of that quality become second-place group stage teams. The quality of the teams advancing doesn't really improve. And at the same time, this creates the likelihood of more group stage stinkers.
Sure, Cape Verde drawing Spain was sort of fun  - as fun as a 0-0 game can be, anyhow - but the price for that is a bunch of noncompetitive games.
Instead of adding more teams, I'd rather see only the top two group stage teams advance, with the top eight getting a bye into the Round of 16.

[Its DJOver]

Also not a fan of third-place group stage teams advancing, but all this does is make it more likely teams of that quality become second-place group stage teams. The quality of the teams advancing doesn't really improve. And at the same time, this creates the likelihood of more group stage stinkers.
Sure, Cape Verde drawing Spain was sort of fun  - as fun as a 0-0 game can be, anyhow - but the price for that is a bunch of noncompetitive games.
Instead of adding more teams, I'd rather see only the top two group stage teams advance, with the top eight getting a bye into the Round of 16.

I get where you're coming from, it's just there were far fewer "bad" group stage games than I expected given the jump from 32 to 48. 2022 still saw 6-2 and 7-0 group stage games. 2018 had 5-0 and 6-1. 2014 had a couple 4-0, a 5-1. Sure 2026 had the 7-1 Curacao thrashing and Qatar 6-0 (albeit down to 9), but the jump wasn't as drastic as I thought it would be. You look at some of the additional teams that would have been there in a 64 team tournament this year and there are obviously no championship contenders, but it's not like the likes of Denmark, Cameroon, Chile and Poland are the absolute dregs of the world. We're not at the point of microstates getting in.

[The Sultan]

I'm fine with 64. More games the better.

[Pakuni]

I get where you're coming from, it's just there were far fewer "bad" group stage games than I expected given the jump from 32 to 48. 2022 still saw 6-2 and 7-0 group stage games. 2018 had 5-0 and 6-1. 2014 had a couple 4-0, a 5-1. Sure 2026 had the 7-1 Curacao thrashing and Qatar 6-0 (albeit down to 9), but the jump wasn't as drastic as I thought it would be. You look at some of the additional teams that would have been there in a 64 team tournament this year and there are obviously no championship contenders, but it's not like the likes of Denmark, Cameroon, Chile and Poland are the absolute dregs of the world. We're not at the point of microstates getting in.

Sure. Italy as well.
But, given that the added 16 are likely to be divvied up among the confederations, you're also getting the likes of Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, the UAE and Zambia.
If you're the "more games the better" kind of guy, that's fair. I'm more in favor of a balance between more games and making it a tournament pitting the best teams.

[Its DJOver]

Sure. Italy as well.
But, given that the added 16 are likely to be divvied up among the confederations, you're also getting the likes of Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, the UAE and Zambia.
If you're the "more games the better" kind of guy, that's fair. I'm more in favor of a balance between more games and making it a tournament pitting the best teams.

There's definitely a balance needed, agree 100%. However, according the the FIFA Rankings (flawed metric I know), the top 16 teams that did not make 2026 were: Italy, Denmark, Nigeria, Ukraine, Poland, Wales, Hungary, Serbia, Cameroon, Slovakia, Greece, Venezuela, Chile, Peru, Costa Rica, and Romania*.  That breaks down to 10 Europe, 3 South America, 2 Africa, and 1 North America. Skew that slightly to get Asia and Oceania on board and give Europe 8, South America 2, Africa 2, North America 2, Asia 1, and Oceania 1 and everyone's happy. Is it more watered down, sure. Is qualifying more boring, yes. But if you're not going back to 32 teams (my preferred format), 64 is better than 48 IMO. Totally understand why some would disagree.

*Does not include still banned Russia.

[Pakuni]

There's definitely a balance needed, agree 100%. However, according the the FIFA Rankings (flawed metric I know), the top 16 teams that did not make 2026 were: Italy, Denmark, Nigeria, Ukraine, Poland, Wales, Hungary, Serbia, Cameroon, Slovakia, Greece, Venezuela, Chile, Peru, Costa Rica, and Romania*.  That breaks down to 10 Europe, 3 South America, 2 Africa, and 1 North America. Skew that slightly to get Asia and Oceania on board and give Europe 8, South America 2, Africa 2, North America 2, Asia 1, and Oceania 1 and everyone's happy. Is it more watered down, sure. Is qualifying more boring, yes. But if you're not going back to 32 teams (my preferred format), 64 is better than 48 IMO. Totally understand why some would disagree.

*Does not include still banned Russia.

I could 100% be wrong about this, but given that UEFA already is guaranteed a third of the field, I'd be surprised if they get 8 of the additional 16. Quality wise, they'd deserve it, I'm just not sure that would be a FIFA priority.

[Its DJOver]

I could 100% be wrong about this, but given that UEFA already is guaranteed a third of the field, I'd be surprised if they get 8 of the additional 16. Quality wise, they'd deserve it, I'm just not sure that would be a FIFA priority.

Hadn't considered that and would be a problem.  Could maybe squeeze it to 6, certainly no less than that, but then the problem's you've been pointing out would be more prominent. I expect FIFA to find the right balance that lines their pockets the most, I just hope that it's not to far from the right sporting balance.

[MuggsyB]

Messi, Martinez, and a gang of Muggsies?

Lord help us all.

I would take caution in your tone. 

[tower912]

I would take caution in your tone. 

Or what?  You punch him in the knee?

[MuggsyB]

Or what?  You punch him in the knee?

Some big guy once said "or what" to Willie Pep at a bar.  It didn't end for him. 

[MuggsyB]

Muggsy pinned J.R. Reid btw. 

[Uncle Rico]

What could go wrong?  Actually, who is going to get richer?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2026/07/29/fifa-head-sets-deadline-for-members-to-claim-20-million-in-kushner-backed-world-cup-plan/

[Pakuni]

In a shocking turn of events, FIFA may have stiffed U.S. host cities on millions in promised revenues.

U.S. host cities for the 2026 World Cup are chasing FIFA for millions of dollars they believe they were promised by soccer's governing body which have so far gone unpaid.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7491195/2026/08/04/world-cup-host-cities-payment-fifa/?source=user_shared_article&unlocked_article_code=1.21A.KSPC.v5zHYP65Agbb&smid=ta-android-share

[Uncle Rico]

In a shocking turn of events, FIFA may have stiffed U.S. host cities on millions in promised revenues.

U.S. host cities for the 2026 World Cup are chasing FIFA for millions of dollars they believe they were promised by soccer's governing body which have so far gone unpaid.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7491195/2026/08/04/world-cup-host-cities-payment-fifa/?source=user_shared_article&unlocked_article_code=1.21A.KSPC.v5zHYP65Agbb&smid=ta-android-share

I know one family that got rich off the World Cup.

[Pakuni]

I know one family that got rich off the World Cup.

I know one family that got rich off not paying its bills.

[WhiteTrash]

In a shocking turn of events, FIFA may have stiffed U.S. host cities on millions in promised revenues.

U.S. host cities for the 2026 World Cup are chasing FIFA for millions of dollars they believe they were promised by soccer's governing body which have so far gone unpaid.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7491195/2026/08/04/world-cup-host-cities-payment-fifa/?source=user_shared_article&unlocked_article_code=1.21A.KSPC.v5zHYP65Agbb&smid=ta-android-share

Maybe Chicago was smarter than we think.