FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread

[LUCKMCFLY]

And Canada and Mexico will host a total of 20 games, right? Or are there any changes?

From what I know, Canada and Mexico will host 10 games each and the rest will be held in US soil. That is quite less because in this new format where 48 teams will play, there will be a total of 100+ games. I mean, it should be maximized because they also have a large stadium to host some of the games and it will be a big help to the host cities to boost their businesses.

As far as I know, this 10-match figure was decided earlier, when FIFA was thinking about a 3 team per group format. But then they changed the format to 4-team groups and therefore the total number of matches almost doubled to 104. So I guess both Canada and Mexico will get more matches to be staged within their borders. But I have a question here. If USA is hosting more than 70% of the matches, then why Canada and Mexico are being allotted automatic qualification to the 2026 World Cup? They are not co-hosts. They are just subsidiary hosts.

Well, many things are evident here, the first is obvious that the USA has total control over things, I don't know whether to call it hegemony, or power, because it is always the same, the Country that has the most power in everything is the USA, and In this particular case, Canada follows and then finally Mexico, although I am in favor of something, there are 3 games, they must be held equally in the 3 countries and the country that is the Opening should not be where the final is held, but in Given the state of things, I don't know how the games are managed, and which country is most likely to host the most games.

[1714647020]

1714647020

[1714647020]

1714647020

[1714647020]

1714647020

[1714647020]

1714647020

[1714647020]

1714647020

[1714647020]

1714647020

[Vaskiy]

And Canada and Mexico will host a total of 20 games, right? Or are there any changes?

From what I know, Canada and Mexico will host 10 games each and the rest will be held in US soil. That is quite less because in this new format where 48 teams will play, there will be a total of 100+ games. I mean, it should be maximized because they also have a large stadium to host some of the games and it will be a big help to the host cities to boost their businesses.

As far as I know, this 10-match figure was decided earlier, when FIFA was thinking about a 3 team per group format. But then they changed the format to 4-team groups and therefore the total number of matches almost doubled to 104. So I guess both Canada and Mexico will get more matches to be staged within their borders. But I have a question here. If USA is hosting more than 70% of the matches, then why Canada and Mexico are being allotted automatic qualification to the 2026 World Cup? They are not co-hosts. They are just subsidiary hosts.

Well, many things are evident here, the first is obvious that the USA has total control over things, I don't know whether to call it hegemony, or power, because it is always the same, the Country that has the most power in everything is the USA, and In this particular case, Canada follows and then finally Mexico, although I am in favor of something, there are 3 games, they must be held equally in the 3 countries and the country that is the Opening should not be where the final is held, but in Given the state of things, I don't know how the games are managed, and which country is most likely to host the most games.

USA will have control, next will be Canada and atlast it will be Mexico. As in the previous post, somehow the involvement of three countries into the league needs to be appreciated. When a small country like Qatar can host, USA and the other two countries can host the World Cup independent. But the three countries agreed to co-host needs to be appreciated and for the same reason three countries are into the league. We can't be conclusive, because beyond our thoughts the officials will be thinking about this and they'd be having specific reasons for each and every activity connected with it.

[Sithara007]

USA will have control, next will be Canada and atlast it will be Mexico. As in the previous post, somehow the involvement of three countries into the league needs to be appreciated. When a small country like Qatar can host, USA and the other two countries can host the World Cup independent. But the three countries agreed to co-host needs to be appreciated and for the same reason three countries are into the league. We can't be conclusive, because beyond our thoughts the officials will be thinking about this and they'd be having specific reasons for each and every activity connected with it.

Out of the total of 104 matches, as per my understanding a total of 80 will be hosted by the United States. I guess Mexico and Canada will be hosting 12 matches each. Not the ideal situation where each of the co-hosts getting an equal share of matches. Then numbers indicate that the United States are the real hosts, and Canada and Mexico are there just to make up the numbers. And it is not surprising at all. Both these nations don't have the necessary infrastructure to host such a large number of matches. They got the automatic qualification as a result of being the co-hosts and they should be happy about it.

[alegotardo]

Out of the total of 104 matches, as per my understanding a total of 80 will be hosted by the United States. I guess Mexico and Canada will be hosting 12 matches each. Not the ideal situation where each of the co-hosts getting an equal share of matches. Then numbers indicate that the United States are the real hosts, and Canada and Mexico are there just to make up the numbers. And it is not surprising at all. Both these nations don't have the necessary infrastructure to host such a large number of matches. They got the automatic qualification as a result of being the co-hosts and they should be happy about it.

I think this division is fair and I'm sure Mexico and Canada are also happy with it. I believe that if it weren't for the United States, the championship would hardly have been played in North America.

There is still no official calendar of games or which teams will play in each country, but I am sure that even hosting few games, Mexico and Canada will benefit a lot economically from this event.
I would love to be able to watch a game in person, but I will wait for the next event to be hosted again in Latin America.

For the time being, I'm already saving the necessary money to attend the under-20 cup to be held in Argentina.

[shogun47]

USA will have control, next will be Canada and atlast it will be Mexico. As in the previous post, somehow the involvement of three countries into the league needs to be appreciated. When a small country like Qatar can host, USA and the other two countries can host the World Cup independent. But the three countries agreed to co-host needs to be appreciated and for the same reason three countries are into the league. We can't be conclusive, because beyond our thoughts the officials will be thinking about this and they'd be having specific reasons for each and every activity connected with it.

Out of the total of 104 matches, as per my understanding a total of 80 will be hosted by the United States. I guess Mexico and Canada will be hosting 12 matches each. Not the ideal situation where each of the co-hosts getting an equal share of matches. Then numbers indicate that the United States are the real hosts, and Canada and Mexico are there just to make up the numbers. And it is not surprising at all. Both these nations don't have the necessary infrastructure to host such a large number of matches. They got the automatic qualification as a result of being the co-hosts and they should be happy about it.

I was wondering where you got this info from and so I thought I dig a bit deeper and prepare some of the information.

It is actually 80 games in total with 48 teams and 16 groups with 3 teams each. I know that the Wikipedia article says something else, but that is wrong:


As was stated further down, some of the info I provided was wrong. The data on Wikipedia is correct and is put together as follows:

6 games per group (x12) = 72 games

Round of 32 = 16 games

Round of 16 = 8 games

Round of 8 = 4 games

Round of 4 = 2 games

Game for 3rd = 1 game

Final = 1 game

=> 104 games


What I also find interesting because it has already been discussed here is the following map.



I don't think it has been posted before as far as I know. Now we can check out the stadiums and see where everything takes place. It is quite all over the place! I am curious how they are going to sort out the groups and whether every team could be subject to mass traveling. But either way this is going to be a mega event!

[Sithara007]

^^^ LOL.. this shogun dude got it all wrong. Check the article again, shogun47. It is from 2018. Back then it was the plan. FIFA wanted to have 16 groups of 3 teams each and the total number of matches was set at 80. But after Qatar 2022, FIFA changed the format for the 2026 World Cup and went back to 4-team per group setting. This was done in order to avoid strong teams from getting kicked out of the world cup, in case they have the misfortune of suffering one or two upset results. For a more updated news article, you can refer this one. This is from 2023, and not from 2018:

https://www.aljazeera.com/sports/2023/3/14/fifa-confirms-expanded-2026-world-cup-with-record-104-matches

[Zlantann]

Out of the total of 104 matches, as per my understanding a total of 80 will be hosted by the United States. I guess Mexico and Canada will be hosting 12 matches each. Not the ideal situation where each of the co-hosts getting an equal share of matches. Then numbers indicate that the United States are the real hosts, and Canada and Mexico are there just to make up the numbers. And it is not surprising at all. Both these nations don't have the necessary infrastructure to host such a large number of matches. They got the automatic qualification as a result of being the co-hosts and they should be happy about it.

The US has more sporting facilities than the other and the country have already proposed eleven venues across the country. I was thinking that based on the landmass of Canada they would have more venues than Mexico but I was wrong because Mexico has proposed three venues and Canada is projecting two stadiums.

I think this division is fair and I'm sure Mexico and Canada are also happy with it. I believe that if it weren't for the United States, the championship would hardly have been played in North America.

There is still no official calendar of games or which teams will play in each country, but I am sure that even hosting few games, Mexico and Canada will benefit a lot economically from this event.
I would love to be able to watch a game in person, but I will wait for the next event to be hosted again in Latin America.

For the time being, I'm already saving the necessary money to attend the under-20 cup to be held in Argentina.

I also think that the financial strength of the United States contributed to this arrangement. Mexico and Canada might not be willing to invest more money in the world cup like the US. No doubt the world cup will attract fans from all around the world to these host nations and it might have some economic benefits to these nations. The tourism and hospitality sector will enjoy global patronage.

[Leviathan.007]

USA will have control, next will be Canada and atlast it will be Mexico. As in the previous post, somehow the involvement of three countries into the league needs to be appreciated. When a small country like Qatar can host, USA and the other two countries can host the World Cup independent. But the three countries agreed to co-host needs to be appreciated and for the same reason three countries are into the league. We can't be conclusive, because beyond our thoughts the officials will be thinking about this and they'd be having specific reasons for each and every activity connected with it.

Out of the total of 104 matches, as per my understanding a total of 80 will be hosted by the United States. I guess Mexico and Canada will be hosting 12 matches each. Not the ideal situation where each of the co-hosts getting an equal share of matches. Then numbers indicate that the United States are the real hosts, and Canada and Mexico are there just to make up the numbers. And it is not surprising at all. Both these nations don't have the necessary infrastructure to host such a large number of matches. They got the automatic qualification as a result of being the co-hosts and they should be happy about it.

Please link us to a source about the division of the 2026 world cup games if you are sure about it because if really three countries are hosting the world cup I was expecting to see all of them have the same chance for hosting the world cup 12 matches is nothing comparing to 80 hosting by the America.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

USA will have control, next will be Canada and atlast it will be Mexico. As in the previous post, somehow the involvement of three countries into the league needs to be appreciated. When a small country like Qatar can host, USA and the other two countries can host the World Cup independent. But the three countries agreed to co-host needs to be appreciated and for the same reason three countries are into the league. We can't be conclusive, because beyond our thoughts the officials will be thinking about this and they'd be having specific reasons for each and every activity connected with it.

Out of the total of 104 matches, as per my understanding a total of 80 will be hosted by the United States. I guess Mexico and Canada will be hosting 12 matches each. Not the ideal situation where each of the co-hosts getting an equal share of matches. Then numbers indicate that the United States are the real hosts, and Canada and Mexico are there just to make up the numbers. And it is not surprising at all. Both these nations don't have the necessary infrastructure to host such a large number of matches. They got the automatic qualification as a result of being the co-hosts and they should be happy about it.

Please link us to a source about the division of the 2026 world cup games if you are sure about it because if really three countries are hosting the world cup I was expecting to see all of them have the same chance for hosting the world cup 12 matches is nothing comparing to 80 hosting by the America.

The fact that three countries will be hosting the 2026 world cup is already verified, though USA is the main host, which simply means that more games will be played in the US, games played in Canada and Mexico will be lesser, though I personally have not studied the figures yet.
And concerning the division, 2026 is still very far away, I mean we still like 3 years from now, I don't know if the division for the 2026 world cup is out by now, but if it is, I would love to see it too, but again, I still consider it very early for such information to the out already.

[rdluffy]

Please link us to a source about the division of the 2026 world cup games if you are sure about it because if really three countries are hosting the world cup I was expecting to see all of them have the same chance for hosting the world cup 12 matches is nothing comparing to 80 hosting by the America.

I will post here what I know, because I have always followed this issue of the 2026 World Cup.

Before FIFA confirmed the new format of the 2026 World Cup with 48 teams, we had unofficial news, but it appeared in various media, that Mexico and Canada would host 10 matches each.


Source

After FIFA's decision to have 12 groups of 4 teams, we still don't have official confirmation of how the division will be done, since now there will be 104 matches in total.
If it continues like this, with 10 matches in Mexico and Canada, that leaves 84 matches in the United States, it is very unbalanced.

In my opinion, the United States will host many more matches than the other two countries, but the 84-10-10 split is not good.
Maybe 64 games in the US and 20 in the other countries would be better.
If we consider the 16 stadiums of the World Cup, where there will be 11 in the USA, 3 in Mexico and 2 in Canada, we can get a better idea of this division.
I believe it is impossible for them to put many matches in Mexico and Canada.

[Silberman]

...

After FIFA's decision to have 12 groups of 4 teams, we still don't have official confirmation of how the division will be done, since now there will be 104 matches in total.
If it continues like this, with 10 matches in Mexico and Canada, that leaves 84 matches in the United States, it is very unbalanced.

In my opinion, the United States will host many more matches than the other two countries, but the 84-10-10 split is not good.
Maybe 64 games in the US and 20 in the other countries would be better.
If we consider the 16 stadiums of the World Cup, where there will be 11 in the USA, 3 in Mexico and 2 in Canada, we can get a better idea of this division.
I believe it is impossible for them to put many matches in Mexico and Canada.

While the split is indeed very unbalanced, it is unlikely big changes will be made on the distribution of the games to each of the three countries, as FIFA itself probably likes this distribution as not only they can get more money this way but it can help promote soccer at the US and could help it to raise in popularity and allow soccer to finally be able to compete against the four major sport leagues on the US.

[tazmantasik]

Have link or source about new format on FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States? I want to read all detail because this time drastically difference than previous edition with participants still 32 national team. Upcoming FIFA World Cup have 48 national teams participants and based on I read each group will not filled by 4 national teams. Seems confused to understood about what the rule of FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States and how many days will needed for next World Cup after participant adding. Seems for final venue will held in United State and disappointed when becoming host more than two countries.

[Leviathan.007]

Please link us to a source about the division of the 2026 world cup games if you are sure about it because if really three countries are hosting the world cup I was expecting to see all of them have the same chance for hosting the world cup 12 matches is nothing comparing to 80 hosting by the America.

I will post here what I know, because I have always followed this issue of the 2026 World Cup.

Before FIFA confirmed the new format of the 2026 World Cup with 48 teams, we had unofficial news, but it appeared in various media, that Mexico and Canada would host 10 matches each.


Source

After FIFA's decision to have 12 groups of 4 teams, we still don't have official confirmation of how the division will be done, since now there will be 104 matches in total.
If it continues like this, with 10 matches in Mexico and Canada, that leaves 84 matches in the United States, it is very unbalanced.

In my opinion, the United States will host many more matches than the other two countries, but the 84-10-10 split is not good.
Maybe 64 games in the US and 20 in the other countries would be better.
If we consider the 16 stadiums of the World Cup, where there will be 11 in the USA, 3 in Mexico and 2 in Canada, we can get a better idea of this division.
I believe it is impossible for them to put many matches in Mexico and Canada.

I guess the reason of they chose Canada and Mexico to just help America with hosting the world cup is more sports facilities they have in America while in Canada and Mexico compared to America there are fewer good quality stadiums and hotels to host the world cup, also the main host is just America and since we have more countries on the world cup this time, two other countries will just help America.

[LUCKMCFLY]

I'm not saying FIFA will allow a bad quality stadium to host the world cup, they surely have some standards and they will check the stadiums before every game also there is the same situation for hotels and training fields and FIFA should warn them if they see any bad quality stadium in any counting hosting the world cup, but still I"m sure you know the weather situation is much better in Canada comparing to Mexico and in the USA they have LA where there are many better hotels comparing Mexico.

Yes, in fact FIFA always makes reviews throughout the 4 years of construction of the World Cup and makes inspections with experts and they always keep their reports, in fact when things don't add up they are capable of taking away the venues, as happened in some sub 17 tournaments, now for the World Cup the demanding standards are higher, so the World Cup has to guarantee the highest quality in the stadiums and in the main soccer regulations, these things will always exist, I imagine that in every World Cup new things come up, and hosts have to meet those demands.

[rdluffy]

Have link or source about new format on FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States? I want to read all detail because this time drastically difference than previous edition with participants still 32 national team. Upcoming FIFA World Cup have 48 national teams participants and based on I read each group will not filled by 4 national teams. Seems confused to understood about what the rule of FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States...

Source: https://www.fifa.com/fifaplus/en/articles/date-set-for-2026-world-cup-final-canada-mexico-usa
This is the official source from FIFA. After the group stage, instead of having the Round of 16, the teams will play a new round, which will be called the Round of 32.

...and how many days will needed for next World Cup after participant adding. Seems for final venue will held in United State and disappointed when becoming host more than two countries.

Source: https://digitalhub.fifa.com/m/3123d37097318f7f/original/Men-s-International-Match-Calendar-2023-2030_EN.pdf
This is the official calendar, you can only see the official date of the final, 19 July, the opening date has not been set yet

...Seems for final venue will held in United State and disappointed when becoming host more than two countries.

Yes, the final will be held in USA, there's no doubt about that, but we don't know in which city yet.
The most favored are Los Angeles, New Jersey and Dallas.
I bet on Los Angeles.

[shogun47]

^^^ LOL.. this shogun dude got it all wrong. Check the article again, shogun47. It is from 2018. Back then it was the plan. FIFA wanted to have 16 groups of 3 teams each and the total number of matches was set at 80. But after Qatar 2022, FIFA changed the format for the 2026 World Cup and went back to 4-team per group setting. This was done in order to avoid strong teams from getting kicked out of the world cup, in case they have the misfortune of suffering one or two upset results. For a more updated news article, you can refer this one. This is from 2023, and not from 2018:

https://www.aljazeera.com/sports/2023/3/14/fifa-confirms-expanded-2026-world-cup-with-record-104-matches

Oh I know where my mistake was, it was initially the plan for the FIFA World Cup 2026 to go with 16 groups and 3 teams each, but they changed it as it was a pending amendment. Seems that one of the sources I looked at also got it wrong.



Thank you for pointing it out and I will correct it in a moment.

[Leviathan.007]

Yes, in fact FIFA always makes reviews throughout the 4 years of construction of the World Cup and makes inspections with experts and they always keep their reports, in fact when things don't add up they are capable of taking away the venues, as happened in some sub 17 tournaments, now for the World Cup the demanding standards are higher, so the World Cup has to guarantee the highest quality in the stadiums and in the main soccer regulations, these things will always exist, I imagine that in every World Cup new things come up, and hosts have to meet those demands.

The quality of the stadiums and any other facilities should be obviously higher than the last world cup we saw because four years passed and we can have better technologies for stadiums and this can definitely help the hosts, while in some countries they don't have a good financial system like Qatar does, they can't provide good quality facilities if they don't already have enough facilities.

[EarnOnVictor]

Yes, in fact FIFA always makes reviews throughout the 4 years of construction of the World Cup and makes inspections with experts and they always keep their reports, in fact when things don't add up they are capable of taking away the venues, as happened in some sub 17 tournaments, now for the World Cup the demanding standards are higher, so the World Cup has to guarantee the highest quality in the stadiums and in the main soccer regulations, these things will always exist, I imagine that in every World Cup new things come up, and hosts have to meet those demands.

The quality of the stadiums and any other facilities should be obviously higher than the last world cup we saw because four years passed and we can have better technologies for stadiums and this can definitely help the hosts, while in some countries they don't have a good financial system like Qatar does, they can't provide good quality facilities if they don't already have enough facilities.

I still wonder what gives FIFA the unwarranted reason to change the football's narrative, letting many countries host the World Cup will not be cost-effective to viewers who make themselves physically available. But this might be more money for FIFA which might be their plan. I will be folding my hands as things unfold, but they will not be able to deliver extras more than what they've been doing in the past.

It's a litmus test though, I hope it's worth it more than before. And as for the quality of stadiums, I bet the US is qualified, no wonder more matches would be played there. So qualified are Canada and Mexico, but playing lower hosts perhaps due to their capabilities.

[nullama]

~snip~
The quality of the stadiums and any other facilities should be obviously higher than the last world cup we saw because four years passed and we can have better technologies for stadiums and this can definitely help the hosts, while in some countries they don't have a good financial system like Qatar does, they can't provide good quality facilities if they don't already have enough facilities.

Well, 2 out of the 3 countries have already hosted the world cup in the past, Mexico and the US. So basically there's a big chance they would just be reusing their current infrastructure.

I don't think they're going to spend too much making new stadiums or renovating old ones.

[Tumanggor]

Yes, in fact FIFA always makes reviews throughout the 4 years of construction of the World Cup and makes inspections with experts and they always keep their reports, in fact when things don't add up they are capable of taking away the venues, as happened in some sub 17 tournaments, now for the World Cup the demanding standards are higher, so the World Cup has to guarantee the highest quality in the stadiums and in the main soccer regulations, these things will always exist, I imagine that in every World Cup new things come up, and hosts have to meet those demands.

The quality of the stadiums and any other facilities should be obviously higher than the last world cup we saw because four years passed and we can have better technologies for stadiums and this can definitely help the hosts, while in some countries they don't have a good financial system like Qatar does, they can't provide good quality facilities if they don't already have enough facilities.

The USA and Mexico have already hosted the world cup, so both of them must have had good experience regarding the quality of stadiums at world cup events

while Canada has never hosted a world cup, so Canada has to learn from other countries that have hosted it (host the world cup) about how the quality of the stadium