The 2026 World Cup is the first men’s tournament staged across three countries, and it’s the first with 48 teams. That combination changes the scale, the travel, the matchups, and the way managers will treat squad depth. It also changes the mood. There will be more nations, more stories, more first-time fixtures, and more chances for a team to build momentum from an unexpected place.
At the same time, the trophy will almost certainly be won in a familiar way: by a side that can defend under pressure, create goals without needing perfect conditions, and keep its nerve when the tournament reaches the final stages.
Why where matters
The tournament will be hosted by the United States, Canada, and Mexico. In practical terms, that means a World Cup spread across multiple climates and time zones. You will have matches in intense summer heat, matches in cooler evenings, games at altitude, and games by the coast where the air feels heavy. It will be a tournament of logistics as much as talent.
The United States hosts the majority of games and boasts the bulk of venues, which means much of the competition will have an American feel: huge stadiums, long travel days, and scheduling designed for global audiences.
Canada and Mexico bring a different tone. Mexico’s football culture is immediate and loud, and it tends to create pressure on visiting teams, even in neutral games. Canada’s venues will likely feel cleaner and calmer for neutral matches, but the support for the home team is no less intense.
For supporters travelling, it’s a World Cup that rewards planning. The distances are enormous. You could do a classic “two cities in a week” trip, but you can’t easily bounce between venues the way you might in a smaller European tournament. Most fans will pick a region, commit to it, and live inside that version of the World Cup, and might do the same with their predictions, as conversations drift from football betting to travel plans and back again.
How the format changes the tournament
The expansion to 48 teams brings a new structure. There are more group stage matches overall, and the knockouts begin earlier because there is an extra round. That has two big consequences:
First, the group stage becomes less predictable. With more teams and more styles, there will be more mismatches, but also more strange, awkward games where a favourite faces an opponent with nothing to lose and a clear plan to spoil.
Second, the winners will need depth. The champions will likely play an extra knockout match compared to previous formats. That means more minutes, more cumulative fatigue, more chances for a squad to pick up knocks, and more need for managers to trust players outside their best eleven.
A World Cup is not just about who has the best team. It is also about who has the best replacements, the clearest roles, and the ability to change a match without changing the identity.
Who are the favourites?
It’s risky to name a single favourite, but there are clear tiers.
France will go into 2026 as one of the most convincing “tournament teams” in the world. They have a history of coping with different game states. If they need to dominate possession, they can. If they need to sit in and explode in transition, they can. They also tend to have the squad depth that matters in a longer tournament. France’s main danger is talent and rhythm, but when they lose rhythm, they can look like a collection of separate stars rather than a team.
Brazil are always in the conversation, partly because their talent pool is so deep and partly because the World Cup suits their best players. Brazil become truly dangerous when they keep their football simple in the early phases and let creativity show up in the final third. If they arrive with a clear structure behind the ball and a forward line in form, they have a route to the final.
Argentina are harder to predict because the emotional momentum of recent success is difficult to recreate. But competitive maturity travels. Argentina have shown they can win ugly, handle pressure, and stay calm in knockouts. Whether they can do that again depends on how the next generation blends with the established leaders and whether they can keep finding goals in tight games.
England will be close to the top tier if they can solve one question: can they turn control into decisive chances against the best sides? England often look strong until the match becomes a cagey knockout where one big moment decides everything. If they find a more reliable attacking rhythm and keep defensive stability, they will be a serious contender. Their talent base is good enough. The issue is execution under tournament stress.
Spain sit in a similar place. Spain’s possession game can be suffocating, but tournaments punish teams who dominate the ball without putting opponents in genuine danger. If Spain add more direct threat and more presence in the box, they can win the whole thing. If they stay too reliant on perfect patterns, they risk running into a disciplined opponent who turns the game into a set-piece battle.
Other nations that could be in the mix if the cycle breaks right include Germany, Portugal, and the Netherlands. Each has the underlying quality. Each needs the right balance of cohesion, fitness, and in-form attackers at the exact moment the tournament begins.
Important players who could define 2026
World Cups are often decided by players who can create something when the plan fails. The tactical story matters, but it’s usually one of these roles that swings the biggest games.
The match-winning forward. Every tournament has a striker or wide forward who turns half-chances into goals. In 2026, that kind of player will be even more valuable because the expanded format may produce more defensive opponents and more low-block matches. If your forward line can’t finish, you can be knocked out even when playing well.
The midfielder who controls chaos. The best World Cup midfielders do two things well: they protect their defence, and they set the tempo. They know when to slow the game down, when to win a foul, when to recycle possession, and when to break the lines. In a tournament spanning vast distances and shifting climates, the ability to manage energy will be central.
The full back who becomes a weapon. Full-backs increasingly shape modern international football because they create overloads and stretch defences. The sides that go deep often have full-backs who can contribute in the final third without leaving the centre-backs to suffer in transition.
The goalkeeper who steals a knockout. It happens in every World Cup. A keeper makes one save that becomes the hinge of the tournament. In 2026, with an extra knockout match, there are more opportunities for a penalty shootout and more nights where a keeper can become the story.
Key storylines to watch
1) Travel and recovery: Managers will talk about tactics, but behind the scenes, the real battle will be recovery. Long flights, changing time zones, and hot conditions can sap sharpness. Teams with strong sports science departments and smarter rotation plans will gain an advantage that fans rarely see.
2) The new “soft” group stage strategies: With more teams and a different route into the knockouts, some favourites may prioritise survival and fitness over spectacle in the group stage. The teams that time their peak well tend to go far. The teams that burn too hot early can run out of edge by the quarter finals.
3) The rise of the underdog with structure: With an expanded field, expect at least one surprise run. The most dangerous underdogs are not the ones who simply defend deep. They are the ones with a clear transitional threat, set-piece quality, and a midfield that refuses to get stretched.
A grounded prediction, without pretending certainty
The favourites will still be the nations with depth, elite attackers, and tournament experience, but the format makes it easier for a disciplined outsider to catch fire.
If you want a sensible shortlist, start with France and Brazil as the cleanest blends of depth and game-breaking talent. Keep England, Argentina, and Spain close behind, depending on how they evolve in the final build-up. Then choose one or two “structure-first” sides that could ride a strong group and a kind bracket into the last eight.
And when the tournament begins, watch for the first sign of a team that can win without playing well. That is usually the team that ends up holding the trophy.