The World Cup is about to start! What’s the World Cup? 

The FIFA World Cup is a soccer tournament where teams representing different nations compete to determine who the best in the world is. It’s been held every four years since 1930, with a twelve year break between 1938 and 1950 for obvious reasons. There were eleven teams in the first tournament and there will be 48 in this year’s competition. Every tournament takes place somewhere different. This one is being held in the United States, Mexico, and Canada. 

How does it work? 

The 48 qualifying teams are divided into twelve groups of four. The four teams in each group all play each other once and the two best automatically qualify for the knockout rounds. Because this tournament has a janky number of teams, several third place teams will also qualify for the knockouts. That means there’s probably going to be less drama in the opening “group stage” games than in past tournaments but, whatever, it will still be fun! 

The 32 teams that qualify for the knockout rounds are then sorted into a bracket that works the way brackets do. For the sake of this exercise, I’m just going to assume you know what a bracket is. 

I’m not a complete moron. 

Sure. 

You said it was the FIFA World Cup. What’s FIFA? 

FIFA is soccer’s global governing body. It organizes the World Cup and consists of 211 member nations. It’s a famously corrupt organization that was nearly brought down by an FBI investigation ten years ago. But it survived and stands to make as much as $14 billion from the tournament. Most of that money is then distributed to the federations of those 211 member nations, who can more or less do whatever they want with it. 

FIFA and its president Gianni Infantino like to present the tournament as a utopian celebration of diversity and global togetherness but the organization has aligned itself with dictators and autocracies more or less from the beginning. The second tournament was held in Mussolini’s Italy! The last two were in Russia and Qatar. And this tournament, at least the considerable portion of it being hosted in the U.S., further makes a mockery of the World Cup’s supposed ideals. 

This year’s tournament is a disaster… right? 

Yes and no… mostly yes so far. It’s certainly a mess, in some ways that were predictable back in 2018 when the United States was awarded the tournament—alongside cohosts Mexico and Canada—and others that only really emerged after Donald Trump was re-elected a year-and-a-half-ago. 

Infantino, who took over the organization after 2016 has arguably made FIFA even cozier with crooks and despots like Trump. He’s spent the last year-and-a-half sucking up to him at every opportunity, even going as far as to make up a fake “FIFA Peace Prize” to give him after he was sad he didn’t win the Nobel Peace Prize. Infantino has seemingly catered to Trump’s basest instincts and done almost nothing to reign him in. He certainly has never publicly criticized him. 

Let’s just get this out of the way. Trump is making this a lot harder and worse than it could be, right? 

Yes. Back in 2018, you could be forgiven if you looked ahead to this tournament with doe-eyed hope. Trump, then serving his first term, would run for re-election in 2020 and then, win or lose, probably be out of the picture by the time 2026 came around: He would either be term-limited or living in quasi-exile and shame as a one-term president or in prison. The 2026 World Cup would be, it seemed then, firmly in the “post-Trump era.” The fact it would be co-hosted with Mexico and Canada seemed like it would mean something back then: A celebration of neighborliness and cooperation after years of xenophobia and belligerence. 

Well…. Here we are. Trump lost in 2020 but didn’t retreat from public life and wasn’t sent to prison; instead, he was reelected four years later. His second term is significantly worse than his first and has been characterized by, among other things, violent crackdowns against immigrants and immigrant communities and economic and foreign policy shaped around chaos, violence, and stupidity. His administration has attempted to ban much of the world, including residents of several World Cup-qualifying nations, from traveling to the United States and made it dangerous to travel here for pretty much anyone. 

At the same time, he has levied massive tariffs on pretty much every qualifying nation, threatened both of his World Cup cohosts, openly mused about seizing Greenland (which could set off a war with Europe), kidnapped the president of Venezuela (which did not qualify for the tournament), and is currently at war with Iran (which did qualify) for extremely stupid reasons. 

Oh and Trump’s administration is also insanely corrupt and incompetent, which is making everything harder and worse. And it was really bad before! 

That all sounds really bad! But you mentioned there were other problems, too—ones that we should have seen coming. 

For FIFA, a World Cup (primarily) held in a nation as wealthy and rapaciously capitalist as the United States is a generational opportunity. Usually, World Cups come with some economic constraints: They might be held in developing economies or hosted by nations with a tradition of price caps and accessibility. The United States is neither. FIFA knows it can charge more for tickets here than it can anywhere else—and that it can rake in piles of cash from parking, merchandise, even stadium concessions that it can’t when tournaments are hosted pretty much anywhere else in the world. Oh, and city and state governments are footing the bill for security, transportation… pretty much everything! 

Wait, what? 

New Jersey, for instance, is spending $50 million on transportation and security costs—security costs that include protection not just for FIFA officials but for anyone that FIFA deems worthy of protection. At the same time, FIFA will rake in between $11 and $14 billion in revenue. A lot of that comes from TV deals but a lot of it will come from ticket sales and stadiums. And they are going to make that money because host cities made frankly idiotic deals with FIFA. 

Why would they do that? 

The big reason is that these deals were all made in secret several years ago. Back then, cities and states were perfectly happy to drop $50 million because they believed that the tournament would generate billions of dollars. That pretty much never happens but host city and state governments only just seem to have realized how bad they are—which has added a last-minute wrinkle of dysfunction to a tournament that has more or less been defined by dysfunction. The federal government held hundreds of millions of funds for the tournament from states until a couple of months ago, which led to a lot of unnecessary turbulence. New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill, in particular, has waged an unprecedented public relations war against FIFA, which she blames for the high cost (about $100) of rail transportation to and from MetLife Stadium. It’s hard to blame her (for that, at least) for railing against FIFA but they can only shoulder so much responsibility: Sherrill’s predecessor (and fellow Democrat) Phil Murphy made the (terrible) deal she’s now stuck with. 

Why did cities make these terrible agreements? 

They were all made in secret, so it’s hard to say exactly. Some cities—Chicago is a notable example—decided FIFA’s terms weren’t worth the potential upside of becoming a host city. When he was New Jersey governor, Murphy made it clear that he was excited to host the World Cup in his state and that he thought doing so would be an economic boon. Hosting the World Cup is exciting! But he—and others—should have known that it was not going to generate a windfall. Mega events like the World Cup and the Olympics never deliver economic benefits to their hosts. 

But the 2026 World Cup was never going to generate that kind of tourist revenue simply because FIFA was always going to make tickets insanely expensive. Their entire strategy has always been that they should make as much money as possible and so they have, from the very beginning, made that their priority. FIFA does not want cheap tickets that will end up on the resale markets because then resale markets will make money. FIFA wants to make every possible cent it can from this tournament, which has, with few if any exceptions, made it appreciably worse in almost every way. 

One reason fans are staying away is simply because it’s just too expensive to fly thousands of miles to the United States right now. Of course, there are other reasons to stay away. This is not a good time to come to the U.S.—or be in the U.S., for that matter! 

OK that sounds really bad. This is going to be really bad, right? 

Here’s the funny thing: It probably won’t be! There are so many reasons to feel discouraged about this tournament and to tune it out altogether. But… it’s still the World Cup. It’s still the greatest tournament in the history of humanity. There are plenty of reasons to believe that it will deliver the majesty and beauty and transcendence it often does once it kicks off. 

In fact, as bad as this tournament is, it is following what is now a familiar pattern that has more or less defined the last four tournaments. In the lead-up to every World Cup since 2010, there has been a huge surge in negative stories about the host countries. At the last tournament in Qatar, coverage of the host nations’ brutal treatment of migrant workers and minority populations grew so loud that FIFA Gianni Infantino had no choice but to deliver quite possibly the worst, most embarrassing press conference since the invention of the microphone. And then a few days later, the tournament started and everyone forgot about all that stuff. Now, all anyone remembers about the 2022 World Cup was that it was awesome, that it probably featured the greatest final in history, and that Messi, the actual GOAT, won. If you ask anyone in Qatar—well, anyone with power in Qatar—if it was worth it, I’m sure they would say that it was. 

I’ve talked to a lot of people who have covered a lot of World Cups in the lead-up to this tournament and the conventional wisdom is that, as bad as things may be, 2026 will probably follow a familiar script. As bad as coverage gets in the lead-up to the tournament, once it starts all of that will fall away. This is the World Cup, after all! It’s a pretty big deal! 

That sounds like good news! 

Well.. I’m not so certain. The purveyors of the conventional wisdom relayed above are mostly jaundiced soccer journalists. They know a lot more about the World Cup than I do. But I’m a jaundiced political journalist who knows more about Donald Trump than they do. 

The problem with the theory that this will all go away, in my opinion, is that it assumes that this tournament is fundamentally similar to the four that preceded it. I don’t think it is. South Africa, Brazil, Russia, and Qatar all had clear, ulterior motives for hosting the World Cup. They believed it would grow their economies and instill a sense of civic pride (South Africa and Brazil), improve deservedly shaky global reputations (Russia and Qatar), and cement their status on the international stage (all four, but especially Brazil and Qatar). 

Trump, like others—most notably Vladimir Putin, who presided over the 2018 tournament—will want to look good on the world stage. But this tournament is simply not a piece of global or even domestic statecraft in the way that the last four have been. It is not part of a concerted diplomatic or domestic strategy. It certainly is not an existential imperative. There will be more incentives for Donald Trump to behave like a normal, socialized human being between June 11, when it kicks off, and July 20, when it ends, than there normally are. But there are plenty of reasons to be suspicious that recent tournaments will dictate the flow of events. The biggest of those is that Donald Trump is president. There’s simply no way that he is going to behave himself for over a month, let alone that the World Cup will pass without him instigating some sort of domestic or foreign crisis. 

Then, of course, there’s the high possibility of chaos and tragedy that doesn’t emerge directly from Trump but impedes the tournament in some way: ICE roundups, climate-related natural disasters, mass shootings… It really will be a miracle if this goes smoothly. 

That’s… really depressing. 

Yeah, it is. 

… 

But it’s also the World Cup! 

Are you serious? 

Actually, yes. The tournament is still really exciting. In spite of it all, I am still excited about it. 

Why? 

It’s hard not to be tautological about the World Cup. The simplest answer to your question is to simply say “Because it’s the World Cup.” But I’ll give it a shot. 

For over a month, nearly all of the best players in the world will be in the United States playing high stakes, tournament soccer in front of a global audience of billions. As bad as things are, the World Cup is surprisingly resilient. Political chaos, hypercapitalism, FIFA corruption, absurd rule changes (like the introduction of mandatory water breaks that effectively turn games into quarters, ostensibly for “hydration” but actually to air more commercials), the reemergence of England, the continued relevance of Cristiano Ronaldo… the World Cup is still spectacular and thrilling. It still regularly produces great soccer. It’s probably going to be a really good tournament! 

We get it. You like the World Cup. But what’s exciting about this tournament specifically? 

It’s a surprisingly competitive tournament. France has been—in my opinion at least—clearly the best team in each of the last two tournaments. Lionel Messi has been the best player in the last four. This year, however, there isn’t a clear favorite or even a player entering the World Cup as the obvious best player in the world. 

There’s a caveat of sorts to that statement. Spain should have a strong claim to be the favorite. For one thing, the team just won the European championships, where it was head and shoulders better than the competition. For another, it has the best player in the world right now. 

Wait. I thought you said there wasn’t a clear best player in the world right now? 

Lamine Yamal is the best player in the world right now. 

But…? 

But he’s not healthy. He injured his hamstring in April and hasn’t played since. It’s possible he’ll be fit when the tournament kicks off! And a healthy Lamine Yamal can make up for a lot of problems. But Spain has problems. 

In some ways, Spain’s notoriously hysterical and ridiculous soccer media is a blessing. So much attention is being paid to a real problem (Yamal’s hamstring) and a fake one (this is the first Spanish World Cup team to ever not include a player from Real Madrid) has distracted from the fact that the team has real weaknesses. Its center back pairing—likely the experienced (but flawed) Aymeric Laporte with the young, defensively limited Pau Cubarsi—is shaky. In theory its historic area of strength, its midfield, is exceptional but arguably the team’s three best players in that position—Fabian Ruiz, Mikel Merino, and Rodri—are exhausted from punishing club campaigns, are struggling with injury, or both. Rodri, who won the 2024 Ballon D’or in 2024, may be in the midst of a precipitous decline related to injuries and overuse. He might not be, though! But even if he’s fit, Spain has the same problem it seems to every time it lines up at an international tournament: Its strikers just aren’t very good. Sometimes that doesn’t matter though! But sometimes it does! 

Aren’t France supposed to be pretty good? Do they have a shot this time? 

Absolutely. But one of the fun things about this tournament is that each one of the best teams has at least one serious flaw. France once again is bringing arguably the strongest squad to the World Cup, but it is a team that has an air of finality about it. The team’s manager, Didier Deschamps, led the team to victory in Russia and the final in Qatar, both times via a style that suffocated the best attacking talent in the world and privileged stodginess over flair and solidity over individual brilliance. He will certainly adopt that approach again, but there are reasons to suspect results may be different. The team is curiously thin in midfield, where it may rely on fading stalwarts like Adrian Rabiot—who, to be fair, is pretty much only good in World Cups—and N’Golo Kante, who has been playing in Saudi Arabia since 2023. Kylian Mbappe, who has a claim to being the tournament’s best player (especially given Yamal’s injury), is coming off a disastrous campaign at Real Madrid where he spent much of the season in more or less open revolt against the team’s manager and several of its players. France, moreover, is due for disaster and dysfunction. Two successful World Cups in a row is incongrous—three would be a miracle. 

What about the other contenders? 

The other favorites all have problems too. England has Harry Kane, who also may be the best player in the world, and it has a brilliant German manager whose focus on defensive possession and set pieces will make the team unwatchable, even as they increase its chance of success. At the same time, it is a profoundly imbalanced squad with brilliance in several positions (striker and across the midfield) and profound mediocrity at others (left-wing and defense). 

Portugal has an argument for bringing the best starting XI to the World Cup except for the fact that it seems inevitable that a 41-year-old Cristiano Ronaldo will lead its line throughout the tournament. Ronaldo has shown a remarkable ability to evolve over the course of his career but unfortunately he has shown no similar talent for accepting the simple fact that time passes. He’s old now and he’s nowhere near where he was eight years ago, let alone at his peak, but he can’t let go. He will also enter the tournament with an Ahab-like obsession with Messi and the belief that winning the tournament will reignite the “GOAT” debate the 2022 tournament settled. (It won’t.) Messi was the best player on the team that won that year and if Portugal triumphs this summer, it almost certainly will be thanks to the wizardry of Bruno Fernandes, not the aging megalomaniac at striker. Still, the biggest problem Portugal faces isn’t Ronaldo’s ego. It’s the fact that he’s quite clearly their best option at striker. 

As for Argentina, they could very well do it again. But Messi is almost four years older and, though still capable of being the best player in the world for stretches, is clearly on the decline. The team around him is probably worse than it was in 2022, but that doesn’t really matter—it will go as far as Messi takes them, which will probably be quite far. 

Then there’s Brazil. Brazil has disappointed in recent World Cups, but there’s a palpable sense that things are different this time around. Its forward line, a glaring weakness in recent tournaments, is improved, possibly significantly so. It has an elite coach in Carlo Ancelotti who is arguably the best tournament manager in the world at the club level. But Brazil’s roster is arguably as flawed and imbalanced as it has been in recent World Cups and it looks particularly shaky in midfield. And if things go wrong, there will be a clamor for Ancelotti to dust off Neymar Jr. and throw him on the pitch to make something happen. It might! That doesn’t mean it will be good, though. 

So it seems like Spain, France, England, Portugal, Argentina, and Brazil are the contenders. How certain are you that one of them will win? Could a dark horse unseat them?

The fact that six teams are in the mix is really good—that doesn’t happen every tournament. Five of those six have won the tournament before—Portugal is the exception—and track record matters a lot when it comes to the World Cup. Only eight teams have won the tournament since it began in 1930! 

Who else has won the World Cup? 

I’m probably being unfair to Germany, one of the three I didn’t list as a favorite, which is good enough to win the tournament but probably a tier below the six teams I singled out. Uruguay, which won in 1930 and 1950, will play thrilling, high octane soccer and likely be a favorite for neutrals but has only the slightest of chances of going all the way. And then there’s Italy, which has won the tournament four times. They didn’t qualify. 

Wait, Italy didn’t make it? 

Nope, they lost in a playoff to Bosnia & Herzogivinia. They actually haven’t qualified for the tournament since 2014! The last knockout game they won was the 2006 final. It’s crazy! 

Mamma mia! But back to teams that will actually play in the tournament. Do you think a dark horse could win it? 

Again, only eight teams have won the World Cup. It’s really hard to do! But there are good reasons to believe that this tournament will be chaotic. And it might just be chaotic enough for a true underdog to win it all! 

What makes this World Cup so chaotic? 

Well, for one thing it’s being held in North America. There will be plenty of off-field chaos, of course, which we already discussed at great length. But the fact that it is being held in sixteen cities in three countries is kinda nuts! For one thing, it means that some teams are going to have to travel a lot, which is exhausting in a country—excuse me, a continent—this size. The European mind, in particular, cannot handle the idea of a tournament with games played in Vancouver, Mexico City, and Boston. 

For another, it’s going to be hot in a lot of these places. Houston and Miami will both host a lot of games. Heat and travel alone may not fully level the playing field but they do make upsets more likely, especially when teams that are used to traveling vast distances and playing in extreme temperatures face off against those that aren’t—namely the European teams. 

And then there’s the fact that FIFA added a knockout round—and 16 additional teams—to this tournament. 

Wait, what? 

The 2026 World Cup will feature 48 teams. The tournament previously included 32 teams. 

That’s a big change! 

Yes and no! The 32-team World Cup only dates back to 1998. Before then it had 24 teams. Only eleven played in the first tournament! 

For one thing, it means that the group stage will have lower stakes than perhaps any previous version of the tournament. Qualifying for the knockout rounds is really easy! Only sixteen teams will be culled. Finishing third in your group used to be a tragedy. Now, it’s not inconceivable that a third-place finisher could win the tournament—though it’s still unlikely. 

For another, it means that there are just… a lot more teams participating. That’s obvious but it does mark an important shift and it’s not all bad. One of the fun things about this tournament is that it features several debutantes who add to its diversity and magic: Cabo Verde, Curaçao, Jordan, and Uzbekistan will all be playing in their first World Cup. That’s cool! Even if it’s unlikely that any of them will make it out of the group stage. 

Still, the group stage may not have much drama. But a 32-team single-elimination tournament absolutely will, especially in a sport as prone to randomness as soccer. At the same time, tournament seeding will be crazy and also probably kind of random. It’s not hard at all to imagine an underdog finding itself in an advantageous spot in the bracket and then getting lucky. When you factor in the heat and the travel, we may see some real surprises during this tournament. 

Who are some potential dark horses? 

The cowardly answers are Norway, which has the best striker in the world in Erling Haaland, and Morrocco, which just “won” the African Cup of Nations in incredibly stupid fashion. (They lost the game but were awarded the title on a technicality afterwards.) Japan and Colombia will also both bring really strong teams to the World Cup! 

That doesn’t seem that crazy! 

Only eight teams have won the World Cup before! It would be insane if Japan won it, for instance. 

Give me some real underdogs. 

Ecuador is physical, defensively-oriented, and used to playing in punishing weather. They’re not glamorous but their defense is strong and that’s enough to take you really far. Switzerland’s time as a perennial dark horse is probably running out but they might have one more campaign left in them. Austria functions exceptionally well as a team and is well-coached (by Manchester United legend Ralf Rangnick) and could make a run if they aren’t undone by the fact that none of their players score goals. This Mexico team is as flawed and disappointing on paper as every Mexico team has been for several cycles now but—unlike those teams—will play several games at home. 

There’s an air of doomed romance to Scotland that could fuel a surprise run even if it is more likely to lead to an opening defeat to Haiti that will end their World Cup hopes before they begin. Senegal just got their ass handed to them in a friendly by the U.S. Men’s National Team in a friendly but they just actually won the African Cup of Nations and losing a tune-up game to the USMNT can’t mean too much. Although… 

Wait. Does the United States Men’s National Team have a chance? 

Probably not, though they did look very good against Senegal! They have a real coach now in former Tottenham manager Mauricio Pochettino. The team’s best player, winger Christian Pulisic, has been on a remarkable cold streak at the club level but there are plenty of reasons to believe that he’s just been unlucky. Maybe all he needs is playing at home in front of the horrible president he adores. 

The U.S.’s best player is MAGA? 

It’s a distinction without a difference to a lot of people but the short answer is “no one really knows for sure” and the slightly longer one is that he’s probably not a diehard fan of the president. Like most soccer players, he doesn’t seem to be particularly political.

But come on. He did the Trump dance like a week after he got elected in 2024. He did this after years of rumors that he was secretly MAGA. He likes the president. 

Jesus.

Yeah. It’s not great! But he is also clearly the best player the United States will have ever brought to a World Cup. He’s really good! And he’s probably just been unlucky in recent club games. Whatever you think of his politics (bad) he’s really good at soccer. And the team around him… isn’t bad either. 

The team’s second best player, Weston McKennie, is also one of the best players in Italy. He’s a do-everything midfielder who can play almost anywhere. He’ll probably play in a midfield pivot with Tyler Adams, arguably the team’s most important player—partly because he’s pretty good and mostly because he’s the only defensive midfielder they brought. Folarin Balogun and Ricardo Pepi, who will compete to start at striker, are the best players at that position the USMNT has brought to a World Cup since Landon Donovan. That said, neither is that good. Still, there are a lot of good players on this team! Its likely wingbacks, Sergino Dest and Antonee Robinson, are both pretty good! They’re also zippy and attack-minded. They’re really fun to watch!

That sounds… exciting! What’s the catch? 

Well, most of the team isn’t good. There’s a bit of a debate over who will start in goal but it doesn’t really matter because whoever does won’t be very good. Pochettino is almost certainly going to play three centerbacks, a tactical change he made recently to add defensive solidity to an unbalanced team that decidedly lacked it. It’s a shift that has made the team better but it comes with a fatal flaw: The centerbacks themselves. Only one of them, Crystal Palace’s Chris Richards, is good. Only one of them, 38-year-old Tim Ream, can pass. And you have to play three. Whoever the third one is will probably be the team’s worst player on the field, except for maybe the goalie. 

That’s not great! Also Pochettino only brought four midfielders, so if anything happens to Adams and McKennie, they’re screwed.  

Still, the rest of the team is good! The coach is good! They’re playing at home! It’s not hard at all to see them doing pretty well.

That would be neat! Right? 

Maybe! It’s possible that this team will unite the nation as it makes a deep run in the tournament! But do you remember all that stuff at the beginning of this? About the president? 

Oh, right… 

Yeah if this team does well, it will almost certainly be tainted in some way by the president. But that’s true of the whole World Cup too.

OK, this has gone on a long time. Who do you think will win? 

I really don’t know! It’s a pretty competitive tournament! 

Come on, just say something. 

Here’s an image that has haunted me in recent weeks: Donald Trump handing the FIFA World Cup trophy to Cristiano Ronaldo.