FIFA World Cup Preview (Ticket Application Preparation)
Skip To
Format Change Increases the Tournament from 32 to 48 teams
Higher participation and more underdogs, leads to a higher chance of a Cinderella story
For higher ranked teams see them on Matchday 1
For lower ranked teams see them on Matchday 3
Format Change
The 2026 FIFA World Cup marks an expansion of the tournament, increasing the number of participating teams from 32 to 48 for the first time. FIFA officially approved the expansion in January 2017, aiming to boost global representation. The last time they increased the field was in 1998 expanding to 32 from 24.
Number of Participating Teams in the World Cup by Year
The new format includes 12 groups of four teams, with the top two teams from each group and the eight best third-place finishers advancing to a newly introduced Round of 32. This adds 40 additional matches, bringing the total number of games from 64 to 104. The tournament is now one week longer than the 32 days (used for 2018 & 2014, 2022 was abridged due to its timing in the winter at 29 days). I could go into some pros and cons, but here are some people on Reddit discussing other format alternatives.
I’ll be reviewing the pros and cons of the expansion via the Group Stage and the Round of 32, as well as some analyses of what will come of it (specifically the changes the Euros made going from 16 to 24 which I think is a good comparable) and make some predictions for tickets.
Expansion
The party line of expansion is to have more teams participate. While the inclusivity is real, it can often be overshadowed by the obvious greed to add matches and increase revenues. The European Championships are a good comparable, since they are the second most watched international soccer competition after the World Cup and starting in 2016 they expanded to 24 teams from 16 teams (similar format change and format structure). I took data from the previous 3 (2004, 2008, and 2012) and compared it to the recent 3 (2016, 2020, and 2024), to see what impacts there were on this format change. There are some obvious caveats that global football differs from European football, and strategy / the game has changed a lot over the past couple of decades.
First off, more teams debuted in the expanded version (7/8, depending how you count successor nations) compared to the previous 3 at 16 teams (4). So that is definitely true. 1996 is when they expanded from 8 to 16.
I don’t feel like finding the data, but it could be easily assumed that for a debut country to feature in a prestigious tournament like this, it means a lot to fans who have never seen their team compete at this level. That passion can be unrivaled and exactly what I love about sports. Iceland comes to mind for their debut in 2016. They introduced the world to their Viking clap celebration (which was promptly coopted by many other nations and teams, including the USA). When Iceland returned to the nation after the tournament, 10% of the country showed up at the airport to welcome them home. More recently Georgia in their debut in 2024 had pretty incredible fan turnout at the tournament and received a great reception upon returning home.
But, how did the bottom ranked teams (8 a tournament or 24 in total) (assuming those are the teams that benefited from the larger participation count) perform? These 24 teams averaged 14th (of the 24 teams in the tournament). So mostly cannon fodder… 46% of them were knocked out in the group stage. And another 38% in the first knockout round or 83% didn’t make it past this point.
Histogram of the 24 Additional Teams' Performance
However, there are 4 teams that really made great runs. And these Cinderella stories could arguably make all of this worth it. The aforementioned Iceland team on their debut made an epic run to the Quarterfinals. The Czech Republic and Switzerland also made Quarterfinal appearances in 2020 and 2024 respectively. But the best ever performance from a bottom 8 team has to be Wales on their debut. Making it to the semifinals, losing to Portugal, they were celebrated quite hard by their supporters.
So of these 16 new entrants in the World Cup, we can probably expect a similar result (assuming Europe’s distribution of quality of team matches the world’s, which is probably slightly inaccurate; the 24 lower ranked teams had a goal differential of -.92 through the group stage, I would expect the world’s bottom 16 to be worse than this, but it’s possible they’re not!). Anyway, I digress, for now, let’s assume a similar ratio. 7 of the 16 will be knocked out in the group stage, another 6 will be knocked out in the Round of 32. Leaving 3 to get to the Round of 16, and maybe, just maybe, 1 team to make it to the Quarterfinals. If you can somehow guess and follow this theoretical team, you’ll be in for a great ride.
Or more realistically, hopefully there are a few debutants (here are some potentials: TLDR: Jordan, Uzbekistan, Cabo Verde, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Suriname, and Venezuela) or infrequent participants that have strong fanbases who will go bananas (South America ahem). Going to group stage matches for them will be a great time. I mean Jordan, Guatemala, Nicaragua, or Venezuela are must attend group stage matches if they qualify. It’ll get insane.
Group Stage
Let’s start with the historical analysis of the Euros. The points required to get to the next round. The average required points between 2004 - 2012 was 5 v. 2016 - 2024 it was 4. More telling is the amount of points that failed to get you into the next round. That average between 2004 - 2012 was 3 v. 2016 - 2024 it was 1.72. So in the older version, you needed a win and two draws to guarantee a place in the next round (Italy in 2004 somehow didn’t make it through in a very rare three way tie of 5 points), or at least a win and a draw to have a ~75% chance. Now a win and a draw gives you a ~95% chance of qualifying for the next round. 33% of qualified teams got through on just 3 points (one win or three draws) (Portugal went through the group stage with three draws in 2016 before winning the tournament).
I then marked each group stage match with one of 4 designations (Draw, Win by 1, Win by 2, and Win by 3+) (for 36 match group stage tournaments I took the ratio and applied it to be comparable to a 24 match group stage). This proxy is a rough and easy way to note a “good match”. Win by 1 or Win by 2 indicates it was probably competitive, versus a Win by 3+ is not and a Draw is usually less popular than a Win. That said, there are obviously great and/or memorable matches that are draws or blow outs. So, take this with a grain of salt, but I needed a fast and clean way to compare everything. The results were, slight, but definitive.
The 24 team change has mostly negative effects on the group stage. More draws and blowouts, and fewer competitive matches. Fewer goals, and worse matchday 3 matches. The one saving grace could be that Matchday 1 seems to have gotten “better” (at least based on this broad assessment of better). I’m going to break the dead rubber match terminology into two:
A true dead rubber match is when the outcome of the match has no potential bearing on the outcome on either team participating
A partial dead rubber match is when the outcome of the match only has potential bearing on one of the teams participating
More than a third of teams had nothing to play for on the final day in the old format, and that increased to over half of them in the expanded format. I was surprised that there weren’t more DRM on Matchday 3, but it was offset because a team with 1 or even 0 points were technically still in it. This probably furthers the hypothesis that teams are trying to win a game more often because one win can get you into the next round. Something that wasn’t very likely before. It was offset however because the bar was lower to guarantee entrance to the next round, the teams with 4+ points were already guaranteed. You can see this in how many more draws there were on the third matchday in the expanded tournament.
A large caveat is that this doesn’t take into account that there are more “underdogs” involved now and that may sway the results. Who you are going into the matches and who you are playing matter. Group stage strategy at this point may be to conserve energy and player health and focus on the minimum number of games to win or points to get to move on. For example, if you’re a high ranked team, you may want to win the first game easily, and then rotate and rest players for the next two games, needing to just get a point to guarantee the next round. The reverse example as a higher seeded team is that you just need one win to have a good shot of going through, so you can really go for it, particularly against your other high seed in the group stage, to have a reasonable chance of getting to the next round.
I expect a similar impact to the World Cup. My previous group stage recommendation was to aim for Matchdays 2 & 3. I now have to rescind that based on the data and predict that Matchday 1 will have the most goals and fewest draws. With the logic being, teams want to go for it early, get a good start, and give themselves the best odds of going through to the next round since one win gives them a great chance. I will still advocate for Matchday 3 for underdogs in particular, because they still have a shot!
Random other notes I have from the research and data gathering:
2 teams triple drawed and got through the group stage in 2024, 1 team did it in 2016 (none in 2020)
England is incredibly boring in the modern group stage. They scored 7 goals in 9 matches (over three tournaments) qualifying each time. A proponent might say defense is important and they’ve had two final appearances in a row… but still…
Round of 32
The new Round of 32 knockout round will inherently feature more lopsided matches, like the group stage. However, the jeopardy is there, and with American Any Given Sunday attitude, anything can happen! Let’s start with the Euros again, I have that dataset locked in and want to take a gander at how the format change affected their first knockout round.
I categorized extra time and penalty kick wins as “Draws” and added in Win by 1’s to create “Close Games”. Win by 2’s and 3+ became “Blowout Games”.
2004, 2008, & 2012
8 were Close & 4 were Blowouts; a percentage of 67% were Close
2016, 2020, & 2024
14 were Close & 10 were Blowouts; a percentage of 58% were Close
Goals increased from 2.3 to 2.8 in the new format, and increase of 20%
Well, another good question, were there any good upsets in the Euro’s new Round of 16? Evaluating based on UEFA ranking, 3 stand out as clear upsets: Iceland v. England in 2016, Czech v. Netherlands in 2020, and Switzerland v. Italy in 2024. The Euro’s old first knockout round (Quarterfinals) had only 3: Greece v. France in 2004, Russia v. Netherlands in 2008, Turkey v. Croatia in 2008. Not much of a statistical difference, generally the favorites win the first round. This leads to the question… how often are there upsets in knockout rounds? Well the answer is… not often. With the exception of the Greece run that won the whole tournament and was a huge upset, generally the Vegas odds and higher ranked teams are triumphant.
So the first round is generally the only chance a team has, because the field gets heavier with the same familiar juggernauts. So despite the fact that there are fewer close matches, the romance of a single elimination tournament darling is still enticing in this round, because it’s rarer in later rounds. I’ve convinced myself to commit to more knockout round matches this World Cup, even if it’s in the first round, at the very least there will be goals, and maybe an epic underdog.
Ticket Applications
Okay, it’s everywhere on the internet at this point, but basically you just need to register for a FIFA account now. The window will open on September 10th and go through September 19th. There is no benefit to doing it earlier or later in the window, as long as you do it. Technically you need a Visa card to participate in this first window. That said… they’re being remarkably quiet about the whole calendar and the rest of the phases.
The other route you can take if you’re a fan of a particular team is to purchase membership to a country’s supporters group and try to apply through them. Best to do this as soon as possible if there’s a team you want to follow. Here are a few of the links to Teams pages that you can sign up for, but I’m sure nearly every federation has a system to apply:
Join Insiders | U.S. Soccer Official Website
Membership Registration | England Football
They have also not announced anything definitive about the types of tickets people can apply for. There are no confirmed packages for teams, either conditional or guaranteed at this moment. Given that there are Hospitality packages that feature multiple matches at specific venues, I imagine there will be a similar city package available, but we shall see.
My Target Matches Currently
So the data shows… Matchday 1 will be better in the new format. And Matchday 3 and Round of 32 are likely blow outs and dead rubber matches, but are your best chance for an underdog victory. Later knockout stage round games are always in demand (just maybe will be too pricy).
Also, don’t forget, the Club World Cup data showed that games not on workdays sold much better. So, if you are going to buy group stage tickets early, best to target weekends and holidays. 38 matches are on weekends or holidays, so target those (26 in the group stage). Given the Club World Cup and economic indicators, I wouldn’t purchase any ticket ahead of time that isn’t on a preferable date. Though this changes greatly when they announce the teams and schedule in December.
This is personal. I have preferences. This certainly isn’t an end all be all of what matches I’ll go to. Just what I’m vibing right now.
So, blindly, before I know what teams are out there. I’m eyeing Vancouver / Seattle, Atlanta, and Philadelphia / New York. East coast is preferentially because I can work remote easily. Also, these cities, I have contacts in and can stay for free. Plus they’re northern for better weather and have relatively easy access. I’ve also recently cut Texas because they’re a bit too gerrymandery for me right now.
Anything in bold I would buy immediately. Everything else, I’ll mull over.
Vancouver / Seattle
M32 - USA game looks like an ideal Matchday 2 option in Seattle, plus it’s on a Juneteenth.
M6 / M16 are Matchday 1 options that are spaced out nicely with a day between. Could be a good option.
M82 / M85 are Round of 32 options that could be cheap knockout round tickets, but I would prefer Atlanta.
M94 / M96 are Round of 16 options that could be the most convenient way to see two, but I would prefer Atlanta.
M52 / M63 / M64 could be a good Matchday 3 option, but probably worth waiting to see which teams are assigned to them.
Atlanta
M102 is a semi-final match that I would really like to get tickets to. This is a stretch goal, but I would like it to work out and take Mattos’ parents.
M95 is a Round of 16 match that could be a good safety option.
M80 is a Round of 32 match that could be a cheaper option to take Mattos’ parents to and give them a taste of the World Cup. Plus could lead into a nice 4th of July weekend.
Philadelphia / New York
M89 / M91 are Round of 16 options that would be great gets if I could get them. Easy to get to, with lots of friends and family who could come with (plus weekend demand)
M55 / M56 / M68 / M67 are all convenient options for Matchday 3, but probably worth waiting to see which teams are assigned to them. The latter two are weekends, so that would be a good shot.
M7 / M9 could be good kickoff options on Matchday 1 for affordable matches, plus they’re on a weekend and would have strong demand.
M17 is a Matchday 1 discount ticket that I’ll snag when demand slows.
M104 obviously would be cool, but I absolutely doubt I’ll have a shot at that. Certainly not for a reasonable price. Buy it if you can get it for face value. It will almost certainly sell out.