10 Ways the 2026 World Cup Qualifiers Have Changed Football (And Not All for Good)

The 2026 World Cup is still two years away, but the qualifiers are already in full swing. And I've got to be honest: they're a mess. FIFA expanded the tournament from 32 to 48 teams, which means more countries get a chance to play. That sounds great in theory. In practice, the qualifying process has become bloated, confusing, and—dare I say it—boring.

I've been following the qualifiers closely since they started in March 2026. I've watched games from Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Americas. Some matches were thrilling. Others felt like glorified friendlies. Here's my list of 10 ways the new format is changing football, for better or worse.

1. More Teams Means More Mismatches

Under the old system, 32 teams meant only the best made it. Now, 48 teams get in, which includes countries that have never qualified before. That's exciting for them—imagine being a fan of a small nation finally making it to the big stage. But it also means we get games like Brazil vs. San Marino (disclaimer: San Marino isn't in the qualifiers, but you get the point). In the CONCACAF region, the US and Mexico are steamrolling opponents like Belize and St. Kitts and Nevis. The scorelines are embarrassing: 8-0, 7-0, 10-1. I don't blame the small teams; they're doing their best. But the competitive gap is widening.

2. The Travel Schedule Is a Nightmare

Regional confederations have had to reorganize their schedules. For example, the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) now has 8.5 spots, up from 4.5. That means more travel for players. A team from Bhutan might have to fly to Qatar, then to Japan, then to Australia, all within two weeks. The jet lag is brutal. European clubs are complaining, as always, because their star players come back exhausted. FIFA doesn't care—they want the revenue from more games.

3. The Format Is Confusing

Each confederation has its own qualifying system. UEFA has 16 teams (up from 13) with a complex group stage and playoffs. CONMEBOL has 6.5 spots (up from 4.5) with a single league table. CAF has 9.5 spots (up from 5) with a preliminary round, group stage, and knockout playoffs. I'm a football fan, and I can't keep track of which teams are where. My casual fan friends have given up entirely. FIFA needs a unified system. They won't do it because each confederation wants to keep control.

4. The Quality of Football Is Drops (In Some Regions)

More teams means weaker teams in the mix. In the past, the World Cup groups were packed with strong sides. Now, you'll have groups where two teams are clearly outmatched. The result? Less competitive matches, more one-sided games, and a tournament that feels diluted. Defenders of the expansion say it grows the global game. I say it waters down the product.

5. The Revenue Explosion

FIFA is making bank. More games equals more TV deals, more sponsors, more ticket sales. The 2026 World Cup is expected to generate $11 billion in revenue, up from $7.5 billion in 2022. That money is supposed to be invested in grassroots football. Will it actually happen? History says no. FIFA has a track record of corruption and mismanagement (thanks, Sepp Blatter). I'll believe it when I see it.

6. The Underdog Stories Are Genuinely Moving

I can't ignore the positives. For small nations, qualifying for the World Cup is a life-changing event. In Africa, countries like Cape Verde and Comoros are on the verge of their first qualification. In Asia, Bhutan and the Maldives are dreaming big. I watched a qualifier between Bhutan and the Philippines in April. The stadium was packed, the crowd was ecstatic, and the players—many of whom work day jobs—played with passion. That's the spirit of football. The expansion gives those stories a platform.

7. The Club vs. Country Battle Is Worse

European clubs hate the expanded World Cup. They see it as a threat to their players' fitness and their own revenue. The Premier League, La Liga, and Serie A have threatened to sue FIFA over the increased workload. The players are caught in the middle. We've already seen several injuries during qualifiers: Kylian Mbappé missed a month with a hamstring strain after a qualifier in November 2025. It's a mess.

8. The Technology Gap Exposed

Smaller nations can't afford the same technology as big ones. VAR (video assistant refereeing) is now mandatory in World Cup qualifiers, but many smaller federations can't afford the equipment or trained officials. In some African qualifiers, VAR is only available in certain stadiums, leading to inconsistent decisions. It's unfair, but FIFA won't subsidize it.

9. The Atmosphere Is Unique

Qualifying stages have a raw, unfiltered energy. I watched a CONCACAF qualifier in Tegucigalpa, Honduras (on TV). The stadium was a cauldron of noise. Fans were waving flags, singing, setting off fireworks. It felt like a World Cup final. That's something the group stage of the actual tournament might lose with more teams and bigger stadiums. The qualifiers feel more intimate and passionate.

10. The Future: Will It Last?

I don't think the 48-team format is here to stay. The 2030 World Cup (hosted by Morocco, Spain, and Portugal) might revert to 32 teams, or go to 40. FIFA is experimenting. The 2026 edition is a test. If the quality suffers and fans complain, they'll change it. But if the money keeps flowing, they won't. Football is a business now. It's sad, but it's true.

I'll still watch the 2026 World Cup. I'll cheer for the underdogs. But I'll miss the days when qualification meant something. When every game mattered. When the World Cup wasn't diluted by politics and profits. Maybe I'm just getting old.