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

[Sithara007]

My guess is that FIFA want to put Qatar behind and start off with the right foot in North America.
Besides, they may believe that changing the size of the tournament could bring more attention and profit to the next World Cup. It may have something too do that this next time it will be a bigger event (geographically) and plan to do it bigger on all sense.

Bigger does not mean better, though. I remain neutral to that decision.

I have mentioned manytimes before, I remain as a strong supporter of the decision by FIFA to increase the number of participants to 48. As we have seen from Qatar 2022, some of the most entertaining matches involved teams that would struggle to qualify for a 32-team event (I am talking about teams such as Cameroon, Morocco and South Korea). Also, when we are calling this tournament as a world cup, there is a requirement to ensure representation from all the geographies around the world. Look at the map below, and please let me know whether you find this representation or not:

[gagux123]

Which kind of events are you talking about gagux123?

Well, I believe I was very generalist when I mentioned "event", but I was referring to the World Cup what will happen in 2026.
I have no doubt that this type of ""event"" (World Cup) is one of the most famous and expected nowadays.

[slackovic]

My guess is that FIFA want to put Qatar behind and start off with the right foot in North America.
Besides, they may believe that changing the size of the tournament could bring more attention and profit to the next World Cup. It may have something too do that this next time it will be a bigger event (geographically) and plan to do it bigger on all sense.

Bigger does not mean better, though. I remain neutral to that decision.

I have mentioned manytimes before, I remain as a strong supporter of the decision by FIFA to increase the number of participants to 48. As we have seen from Qatar 2022, some of the most entertaining matches involved teams that would struggle to qualify for a 32-team event (I am talking about teams such as Cameroon, Morocco and South Korea). Also, when we are calling this tournament as a world cup, there is a requirement to ensure representation from all the geographies around the world. Look at the map below, and please let me know whether you find this representation or not:

You can never have all locations in the world evenly represented in the FIFA World Cup because European countries play better football and more of them qualifies. It's just a matter of which sport is more popular (and funded). The same thing is with some other sport that's not as popular in Europe as in other parts of the world. For example, you can't expect that many European countries will qualify for a world championship in cricket.

[Naficopa]

My guess is that FIFA want to put Qatar behind and start off with the right foot in North America.
Besides, they may believe that changing the size of the tournament could bring more attention and profit to the next World Cup. It may have something too do that this next time it will be a bigger event (geographically) and plan to do it bigger on all sense.

Bigger does not mean better, though. I remain neutral to that decision.

I have mentioned manytimes before, I remain as a strong supporter of the decision by FIFA to increase the number of participants to 48. As we have seen from Qatar 2022, some of the most entertaining matches involved teams that would struggle to qualify for a 32-team event (I am talking about teams such as Cameroon, Morocco and South Korea). Also, when we are calling this tournament as a world cup, there is a requirement to ensure representation from all the geographies around the world. Look at the map below, and please let me know whether you find this representation or not:

You can never have all locations in the world evenly represented in the FIFA World Cup because European countries play better football and more of them qualifies. It's just a matter of which sport is more popular (and funded). The same thing is with some other sport that's not as popular in Europe as in other parts of the world. For example, you can't expect that many European countries will qualify for a world championship in cricket.

That's true European countries are dominating football world and that's why Morocco when made it to semi-final this year was a shock and surprise for whole world . And as far as Asia is concerned there are still no football teams representing in fifa like Pakistan and India and these teams are dominating in cricket world so that's they difference.
I hope so among 48 teams in 2026 Pakistan and India should be inside it .

[slackovic]

You can never have all locations in the world evenly represented in the FIFA World Cup because European countries play better football and more of them qualifies. It's just a matter of which sport is more popular (and funded). The same thing is with some other sport that's not as popular in Europe as in other parts of the world. For example, you can't expect that many European countries will qualify for a world championship in cricket.

That's true European countries are dominating football world and that's why Morocco when made it to semi-final this year was a shock and surprise for whole world . And as far as Asia is concerned there are still no football teams representing in fifa like Pakistan and India and these teams are dominating in cricket world so that's they difference.
I hope so among 48 teams in 2026 Pakistan and India should be inside it .

Coming from Europe, I don't like the fact that FIFA decided to increase the number of teams participating in the World Cup. I don't have anything against teams outside Europe like Pakistan and India competing but I don't want to see a bunch of games in the World Cup ending with goal difference of five or more goals.

[Naficopa]

You can never have all locations in the world evenly represented in the FIFA World Cup because European countries play better football and more of them qualifies. It's just a matter of which sport is more popular (and funded). The same thing is with some other sport that's not as popular in Europe as in other parts of the world. For example, you can't expect that many European countries will qualify for a world championship in cricket.

That's true European countries are dominating football world and that's why Morocco when made it to semi-final this year was a shock and surprise for whole world . And as far as Asia is concerned there are still no football teams representing in fifa like Pakistan and India and these teams are dominating in cricket world so that's they difference.
I hope so among 48 teams in 2026 Pakistan and India should be inside it .

Coming from Europe, I don't like the fact that FIFA decided to increase the number of teams participating in the World Cup. I don't have anything against teams outside Europe like Pakistan and India competing but I don't want to see a bunch of games in the World Cup ending with goal difference of five or more goals.

Fifa just wants to cover the fans from all parts of the world and all continents that's why they have increased number of games in qualifying round . Which is a good move from my point of view as that  will promote football in all parts of world except from Europe and Africa.

[EarnOnVictor]

What I just read here is strange to me, though I had read a thing like that online before but I did not take it seriously. This means that there are now becoming adjustments or supposed advancements to the world cup, I only hope that this adjustment would be a positive one. It's still a litmus test now, and it would require people to shift their location for a single year world cup which I don't think it's really cool when it comes to stress, accommodation and visa arrangements.

However, among the three countries listed to co-host the 2026 world cup, it's only Canada that has not hosted it before, why can't they give them the benefits of doing that once and for all as they always do for the chosen country?

[Pierre 2]

What I just read here is strange to me, though I had read a thing like that online before but I did not take it seriously. This means that there are now becoming adjustments or supposed advancements to the world cup, I only hope that this adjustment would be a positive one. It's still a litmus test now, and it would require people to shift their location for a single year world cup which I don't think it's really cool when it comes to stress, accommodation and visa arrangements.

However, among the three countries listed to co-host the 2026 world cup, it's only Canada that has not hosted it before, why can't they give them the benefits of doing that once and for all as they always do for the chosen country?

I also saw these suggestions about new world cup format, like they plan for it to become year long thing. I feel its not valid for Canada-USA-Mexico cup tho. FIFA can't decide what kind of format they should use. They wanna increase teams but they want World cup to stay very enjoyable tournament. I think traditional monthly cup format is fine and should stay. I also dislike there are 3 hosts to this cup. There should be just one in my opinion.

[Slow death]

My guess is that FIFA want to put Qatar behind and start off with the right foot in North America.
Besides, they may believe that changing the size of the tournament could bring more attention and profit to the next World Cup. It may have something too do that this next time it will be a bigger event (geographically) and plan to do it bigger on all sense.

Bigger does not mean better, though. I remain neutral to that decision.

I have mentioned manytimes before, I remain as a strong supporter of the decision by FIFA to increase the number of participants to 48. As we have seen from Qatar 2022, some of the most entertaining matches involved teams that would struggle to qualify for a 32-team event (I am talking about teams such as Cameroon, Morocco and South Korea). Also, when we are calling this tournament as a world cup, there is a requirement to ensure representation from all the geographies around the world. Look at the map below, and please let me know whether you find this representation or not:

i am also in favor of having more teams in the next world cup, but this will not give any advantage to africa in terms of increasing the chance of winning the world cup, but it will give africa the joy of seeing more teams in the world cup , I think that someone like me who is African already know who will be the teams that will always be in the world cup even when the number of teams increase for the next world cup, senegal, morocco, ghana, nigeria, tunisia, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Egypt, Mali, Togo or Angola will be the teams that will always be in the World Cup

What I just read here is strange to me, though I had read a thing like that online before but I did not take it seriously. This means that there are now becoming adjustments or supposed advancements to the world cup, I only hope that this adjustment would be a positive one. It's still a litmus test now, and it would require people to shift their location for a single year world cup which I don't think it's really cool when it comes to stress, accommodation and visa arrangements.

However, among the three countries listed to co-host the 2026 world cup, it's only Canada that has not hosted it before, why can't they give them the benefits of doing that once and for all as they always do for the chosen country?

I also saw these suggestions about new world cup format, like they plan for it to become year long thing. I feel its not valid for Canada-USA-Mexico cup tho. FIFA can't decide what kind of format they should use. They wanna increase teams but they want World cup to stay very enjoyable tournament. I think traditional monthly cup format is fine and should stay. I also dislike there are 3 hosts to this cup. There should be just one in my opinion.

1 - if they keep the same model, teams will never have the opportunity to enter the world cup

2 - if only 1 country organizes the world cup, then we will never see other countries organizing the world cup, see that there are 4 years a world cup, so if every 4 years there is 1 country organizing the world cup, in that century all countries in the world will organize the world cup

[eaLiTy]

~
I have mentioned manytimes before, I remain as a strong supporter of the decision by FIFA to increase the number of participants to 48. As we have seen from Qatar 2022, some of the most entertaining matches involved teams that would struggle to qualify for a 32-team event (I am talking about teams such as Cameroon, Morocco and South Korea).

Cameroon is on the best team in Africa winning multiple African nations tournament and they have defeated Brazil in World Cup tournament, Morocco won the African nations tournament consecutively recently and they were in great form and that showed in this World Cup as well. South Korea and Japan are the best teams in Asia and only the best team from the 6 continental zones participates in the World Cup and hence you see entertaining matches.

Also, when we are calling this tournament as a world cup, there is a requirement to ensure representation from all the geographies around the world. Look at the map below, and please let me know whether you find this representation or not:

There are zones allocated for each continent and only the best team qualifies and if you water down by adding more teams, the quality will go down. There is no equal representation, only the best compete, you either improve the performance and perform to get included or move aside  .

[Hispo]

-snip-

-snip-

I see your point and it is a valid one, entire continents does not have representation in such and important event worldwide, besides the fact those matches you referenced were indeed interesting and entertaining. Some people may argue that those countries with no representation do not get any because they are not good enough. I would disagree with that latter point of view.

How knows? if this next world cup gets to be excellent and more entertaining from the inclusion of more teams then it could become an standard for years to come.

[Sithara007]

You can never have all locations in the world evenly represented in the FIFA World Cup because European countries play better football and more of them qualifies. It's just a matter of which sport is more popular (and funded). The same thing is with some other sport that's not as popular in Europe as in other parts of the world. For example, you can't expect that many European countries will qualify for a world championship in cricket.

Let me ask you a very straightforward question. Do you believe that a majority of the European teams would be able to perform well in the FIFA World Cup, if the players of immigrant background decides to play for their country of origin? Imagine a French squad without players such as Kylian Mbappé, Ousmane Dembélé, Paul Pogba, Karim Benzema and    Kingsley Coman. Will they even manage to qualify for the world cup? The same can be said about 80% of the UEFA teams. Only a few such as Croatia and Poland are having 100% native squads.

I don't have any issues with UEFA teams including (or stealing) players from AFC/CAF countries. But then it should not be done at the expense of these poorer nations. For the 2022 World Cup, 13 slots were allotted to UEFA nations and just 5 for the CAF. That doesn't sound fair. Even for the 2026 edition, UEFA is being given 16 slots, compared to 9.5 for the CAF.

[nullama]

~snip~
Let me ask you a very straightforward question. Do you believe that a majority of the European teams would be able to perform well in the FIFA World Cup, if the players of immigrant background decides to play for their country of origin? Imagine a French squad without players such as Kylian Mbappé, Ousmane Dembélé, Paul Pogba, Karim Benzema and    Kingsley Coman. Will they even manage to qualify for the world cup? The same can be said about 80% of the UEFA teams. Only a few such as Croatia and Poland are having 100% native squads.

I don't have any issues with UEFA teams including (or stealing) players from AFC/CAF countries. But then it should not be done at the expense of these poorer nations. For the 2022 World Cup, 13 slots were allotted to UEFA nations and just 5 for the CAF. That doesn't sound fair. Even for the 2026 edition, UEFA is being given 16 slots, compared to 9.5 for the CAF.

Mbappé was born in Paris, France.

Dembélé was born in Vernon, France

Pogba was born in Lagny-sur-Marne, France

Benzema was born in Lyon, France

Coman was born in Paris, France

How is that stealing a player from AFC/CAF countries? These players were born in France, how more native you want them to be?

Is not even the case of nationalized players, these people have lived all their lives in France.

[slackovic]

You can never have all locations in the world evenly represented in the FIFA World Cup because European countries play better football and more of them qualifies. It's just a matter of which sport is more popular (and funded). The same thing is with some other sport that's not as popular in Europe as in other parts of the world. For example, you can't expect that many European countries will qualify for a world championship in cricket.

Let me ask you a very straightforward question. Do you believe that a majority of the European teams would be able to perform well in the FIFA World Cup, if the players of immigrant background decides to play for their country of origin? Imagine a French squad without players such as Kylian Mbappé, Ousmane Dembélé, Paul Pogba, Karim Benzema and    Kingsley Coman. Will they even manage to qualify for the world cup? The same can be said about 80% of the UEFA teams. Only a few such as Croatia and Poland are having 100% native squads.

I don't have any issues with UEFA teams including (or stealing) players from AFC/CAF countries. But then it should not be done at the expense of these poorer nations. For the 2022 World Cup, 13 slots were allotted to UEFA nations and just 5 for the CAF. That doesn't sound fair. Even for the 2026 edition, UEFA is being given 16 slots, compared to 9.5 for the CAF.

I don't have any problem with nations outside Europe participating in the World Cup. I'm just stating the fact that no one can expect that the whole world can be evenly represented in the World Cup since football is not that popular outside Europe. And what's the point of getting more slots for the World Cup if those slots gets filled with nations that doesn't care about football. I understand that FIFA wants to make football more popular by doing so, but it will only bring poor matches that no one will want to watch.

Mbappé was born in Paris, France.

Dembélé was born in Vernon, France

Pogba was born in Lagny-sur-Marne, France

Benzema was born in Lyon, France

Coman was born in Paris, France

How is that stealing a player from AFC/CAF countries? These players were born in France, how more native you want them to be?

Is not even the case of nationalized players, these people have lived all their lives in France.

I get to what Shitara007 is saying about naturalized players. For me a player that lived his whole life in some country and trained football in that country from young age should have no problem playing for the national team of that country. You gave example of France players who were born in France and that's OK. It doesn't matter if a player's parents are immigrants. If he learned and played football in one country, he should be allowed to play in their national team.

But there are cases where a player gets citizenship of a country where he wasn't born and didn't play football and because of that citizenship he decides to play for that country's national team. That's not OK.

[Japinat]

I agree, old stars like Messi and Ronaldo are still great, no doubt, but their time is already approaching and eventually, they will be replaced by a much younger stars like the ones you've mentioned that will be playing after their retirement. There's no need to fret about the situation because that's the reality in this world and they won't be playing in the upcoming years as they will become more and more older.

Regarding the next FIFA World Cup, Messi is the one who will likely play compared to Ronaldo because aside from the difference of their age, Messi won't let the situation slide because they are the defending champs and he have every right to play in that historical event. He will be 39 or 40 years old by that time, but I know he's still to play and give the team some help when they needed it.

Maybe both of them can still play the next World Cup as the last one of their careers. They can't play the whole 90 minutes of a match with all the energy and stamina they were used to, as we have already seen in Qatar, but the coach can use them smartly during some strategical moments of the games. It seems a much better idea to have Messi and Ronaldo on the bench, than some random players who are there just to fill the gaps. About Messi, specifically, I'm sure he will be able to at least raise the morale of the national team if he is there side by side with them.

That is if Cristiano Ronaldo still plays professionally by the time the next World Cup will commence because he will be already turning 38 years old next month, February, which means that he would be around 42 years old in the next FIFA World Cup in America. But who knows, right? Messi on the other hand got more chances to play because he's much younger than CR7, it will be a pride for the team if he can still play and defend the championship.

[Sithara007]

I don't have any problem with nations outside Europe participating in the World Cup. I'm just stating the fact that no one can expect that the whole world can be evenly represented in the World Cup since football is not that popular outside Europe. And what's the point of getting more slots for the World Cup if those slots gets filled with nations that doesn't care about football. I understand that FIFA wants to make football more popular by doing so, but it will only bring poor matches that no one will want to watch.

I am not arguing for even representation. It is not possible. If that is the case, then the most populous nations such as China, India and Indonesia would get automatic entry. But I don't want that, because I am ready to admit that these countries don't have the necessary standards to play FIFA world cup at this point. But the 2022 Qatar format doesn't sound proper for me. Asia, a continent with 4 billion people is just allotted 5 out of 32 slots (and the 5th slot came because Australia managed to defeat Peru). I want more representation for regions that are under-represented at this point. And it should be done without negatively impacting anyone. The only way to do this, is to increase the number of participants to 48.

And I strongly disagree, when you say that nations that doesn't care about football will get slots. There are a lot of countries in Asia and Africa were football is the most popular sport. I would not say that my own country can be included in the list, but there are football crazy nations such as Indonesia, Vietnam, South Africa and Nigeria. None of these countries featured in Qatar 2022.

[slackovic]

I am not arguing for even representation. It is not possible. If that is the case, then the most populous nations such as China, India and Indonesia would get automatic entry. But I don't want that, because I am ready to admit that these countries don't have the necessary standards to play FIFA world cup at this point. But the 2022 Qatar format doesn't sound proper for me. Asia, a continent with 4 billion people is just allotted 5 out of 32 slots (and the 5th slot came because Australia managed to defeat Peru). I want more representation for regions that are under-represented at this point. And it should be done without negatively impacting anyone. The only way to do this, is to increase the number of participants to 48.

And I strongly disagree, when you say that nations that doesn't care about football will get slots. There are a lot of countries in Asia and Africa were football is the most popular sport. I would not say that my own country can be included in the list, but there are football crazy nations such as Indonesia, Vietnam, South Africa and Nigeria. None of these countries featured in Qatar 2022.

OK, to end this discussion, let's wait and see how will the games in the World Cup 2026 look like. I agree that every nation should have a chance to compete, but I don't agree that FIFA should let nations that lack quality in football play in the championship just to make it more attractive to the people of those countries.

[Naficopa]

I don't have any problem with nations outside Europe participating in the World Cup. I'm just stating the fact that no one can expect that the whole world can be evenly represented in the World Cup since football is not that popular outside Europe. And what's the point of getting more slots for the World Cup if those slots gets filled with nations that doesn't care about football. I understand that FIFA wants to make football more popular by doing so, but it will only bring poor matches that no one will want to watch.

I am not arguing for even representation. It is not possible. If that is the case, then the most populous nations such as China, India and Indonesia would get automatic entry. But I don't want that, because I am ready to admit that these countries don't have the necessary standards to play FIFA world cup at this point. But the 2022 Qatar format doesn't sound proper for me. Asia, a continent with 4 billion people is just allotted 5 out of 32 slots (and the 5th slot came because Australia managed to defeat Peru). I want more representation for regions that are under-represented at this point. And it should be done without negatively impacting anyone. The only way to do this, is to increase the number of participants to 48.

And I strongly disagree, when you say that nations that doesn't care about football will get slots. There are a lot of countries in Asia and Africa were football is the most popular sport. I would not say that my own country can be included in the list, but there are football crazy nations such as Indonesia, Vietnam, South Africa and Nigeria. None of these countries featured in Qatar 2022.

That's the point when new countries will enter in fifa you never know how many new talented footballers will come in limelight.  Till now Asia is not covered fairly in world cup as many prominent countries don't come in fifa may be because of reason of popularity of football in those countries but many countries have football teams that's play domestically and needs international recognition.  So hoping for fifa to recognize such countries and bring them infront of the world.

[EarnOnVictor]

My guess is that FIFA want to put Qatar behind and start off with the right foot in North America.
Besides, they may believe that changing the size of the tournament could bring more attention and profit to the next World Cup. It may have something too do that this next time it will be a bigger event (geographically) and plan to do it bigger on all sense.

Bigger does not mean better, though. I remain neutral to that decision.

I have mentioned manytimes before, I remain as a strong supporter of the decision by FIFA to increase the number of participants to 48. As we have seen from Qatar 2022, some of the most entertaining matches involved teams that would struggle to qualify for a 32-team event (I am talking about teams such as Cameroon, Morocco and South Korea). Also, when we are calling this tournament as a world cup, there is a requirement to ensure representation from all the geographies around the world. Look at the map below, and please let me know whether you find this representation or not:

i am also in favor of having more teams in the next world cup, but this will not give any advantage to africa in terms of increasing the chance of winning the world cup, but it will give africa the joy of seeing more teams in the world cup , I think that someone like me who is African already know who will be the teams that will always be in the world cup even when the number of teams increase for the next world cup, senegal, morocco, ghana, nigeria, tunisia, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Egypt, Mali, Togo or Angola will be the teams that will always be in the World Cup

What I just read here is strange to me, though I had read a thing like that online before but I did not take it seriously. This means that there are now becoming adjustments or supposed advancements to the world cup, I only hope that this adjustment would be a positive one. It's still a litmus test now, and it would require people to shift their location for a single year world cup which I don't think it's really cool when it comes to stress, accommodation and visa arrangements.

However, among the three countries listed to co-host the 2026 world cup, it's only Canada that has not hosted it before, why can't they give them the benefits of doing that once and for all as they always do for the chosen country?

I also saw these suggestions about new world cup format, like they plan for it to become year long thing. I feel its not valid for Canada-USA-Mexico cup tho. FIFA can't decide what kind of format they should use. They wanna increase teams but they want World cup to stay very enjoyable tournament. I think traditional monthly cup format is fine and should stay. I also dislike there are 3 hosts to this cup. There should be just one in my opinion.

1 - if they keep the same model, teams will never have the opportunity to enter the world cup

2 - if only 1 country organizes the world cup, then we will never see other countries organizing the world cup, see that there are 4 years a world cup, so if every 4 years there is 1 country organizing the world cup, in that century all countries in the world will organize the world cup

I understand your point, fine, but still, we should not think weak of tournaments, it's not for the weaklings, it's for the ones that deserve it. Having more teams in the tournament will not increase the fun, it can only elongate the time at which it would end. To me, it's better they keep it this way, any team that believes they are deserving to partake in the competition should be serious during friendless. The friendlies are enough to watch most of them if one so desires to see them on the pitch.

As for the second point, this should not even be a point of debate, many countries playing cannot host it because they don't have the infrastructure and resources, and if FIFA would do it well, they should adjust their conditions and give more countries that are adequate for the task and have never hosted it before like Canada the opportunity.

[YinShuiSiYuan]

My guess is that FIFA want to put Qatar behind and start off with the right foot in North America.
Besides, they may believe that changing the size of the tournament could bring more attention and profit to the next World Cup. It may have something too do that this next time it will be a bigger event (geographically) and plan to do it bigger on all sense.

Bigger does not mean better, though. I remain neutral to that decision.

I have mentioned manytimes before, I remain as a strong supporter of the decision by FIFA to increase the number of participants to 48. As we have seen from Qatar 2022, some of the most entertaining matches involved teams that would struggle to qualify for a 32-team event (I am talking about teams such as Cameroon, Morocco and South Korea). Also, when we are calling this tournament as a world cup, there is a requirement to ensure representation from all the geographies around the world. Look at the map below, and please let me know whether you find this representation or not:

i am also in favor of having more teams in the next world cup, but this will not give any advantage to africa in terms of increasing the chance of winning the world cup, but it will give africa the joy of seeing more teams in the world cup , I think that someone like me who is African already know who will be the teams that will always be in the world cup even when the number of teams increase for the next world cup, senegal, morocco, ghana, nigeria, tunisia, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Egypt, Mali, Togo or Angola will be the teams that will always be in the World Cup

What I just read here is strange to me, though I had read a thing like that online before but I did not take it seriously. This means that there are now becoming adjustments or supposed advancements to the world cup, I only hope that this adjustment would be a positive one. It's still a litmus test now, and it would require people to shift their location for a single year world cup which I don't think it's really cool when it comes to stress, accommodation and visa arrangements.

However, among the three countries listed to co-host the 2026 world cup, it's only Canada that has not hosted it before, why can't they give them the benefits of doing that once and for all as they always do for the chosen country?

I also saw these suggestions about new world cup format, like they plan for it to become year long thing. I feel its not valid for Canada-USA-Mexico cup tho. FIFA can't decide what kind of format they should use. They wanna increase teams but they want World cup to stay very enjoyable tournament. I think traditional monthly cup format is fine and should stay. I also dislike there are 3 hosts to this cup. There should be just one in my opinion.

1 - if they keep the same model, teams will never have the opportunity to enter the world cup

2 - if only 1 country organizes the world cup, then we will never see other countries organizing the world cup, see that there are 4 years a world cup, so if every 4 years there is 1 country organizing the world cup, in that century all countries in the world will organize the world cup

I understand your point, fine, but still, we should not think weak of tournaments, it's not for the weaklings, it's for the ones that deserve it. Having more teams in the tournament will not increase the fun, it can only elongate the time at which it would end. To me, it's better they keep it this way, any team that believes they are deserving to partake in the competition should be serious during friendless. The friendlies are enough to watch most of them if one so desires to see them on the pitch.

As for the second point, this should not even be a point of debate, many countries playing cannot host it because they don't have the infrastructure and resources, and if FIFA would do it well, they should adjust their conditions and give more countries that are adequate for the task and have never hosted it before like Canada the opportunity.

For football fans watching more and more games is a treat for them ad they will have more teams , more competitive games and more excitement.  Fifa knows this football Is the most celebrated and watched sport in the world , this is a positive initiative by them and hopefully this will give good results. 
As per hosting countries this is good that 3 countries have to host 2026 world cup and people will experience different cultures and environments.  Now the question is the visa policies let's see what will be decided about that.