The Pitch
What's wrong with the current World Cup
- No meaningful group games. Only a handful of matches between top sides — Morocco–Brazil, France–Norway — actually mattered. Most didn't.
- Too many blowouts. Canada 6–0 Qatar is the kind of scoreline you get when the gap between "in" and "in over their head" is this wide.
- Qualifying was unfair to Europe. Teams like Denmark and Italy missed out, while Jordan, Curaçao, and New Zealand all made it in.
- Qualifying didn't matter much for many teams. Too many were locked in or locked out before it counted.
- The minnows got destroyed, for the most part, with no real path to competitiveness. Why are they there except to be cannon fodder?
- Third place was a mess to project. The randomness of which third-place teams advanced made the tournament hard to follow — and the weighting wasn't even, since some group winners drew a third-place team in the knockouts while others drew a runner-up.
The fix: two divisions of 32
Expand to 64 teams, split into two divisions by strength: an A Division (the top 32) and a B Division (the next 32). Each division is drawn into eight groups of four — Groups A–H in the top division, I–P in the second.
The advancement rule is deliberately asymmetric and deliberately simple:
- A Division: the top three of every four-team group advance. Only last place goes home.
- B Division: only the group winner advances.
That's 24 + 8 = 32 teams into a clean Round of 32, seeded so A-Division group winners face B-Division group winners, and A-Division runners-up face A-Division third-placers (shifted to avoid group-stage rematches). No cross-group comparison, no "best third-place team" spreadsheet — every team's path is fixed the moment the groups are drawn.
How it solves each problem
1Dull group games
Only a few matches between elite teams actually mattered.
Put the top 32 teams in Division A and Brazil–Morocco becomes standard, not a rarity — the group stage matters again. Meanwhile Curaçao plays New Zealand instead of getting steamrolled by Germany.
2Blowouts
Canada 6–0 Qatar is what happens when the strength gap is too wide.
Teams play opponents closer to their own level throughout both divisions, so there are more competitive matches and fewer routs.
3Unfair qualifying
Denmark and Italy missed out; Jordan, Curaçao, and New Zealand made the field.
The format shifts more slots toward Europe and Africa, letting more competitive teams in — smaller European nations that were getting choked out get a real chance.
4Qualifying didn't matter
Too many teams were locked in or out before it counted.
Each confederation gets a set allotment for A and B Division, so qualifying actually decides your tier — not just whether you're in. (This also models the old 32-team format, for you traditionalists.)
5Minnows had no shot
Small nations were cannon fodder with no path to competitiveness.
Minnows finally get a real shot in Division B. Uzbekistan can have a realistic shot at winning a World Cup match.
6The third-place mess
Unpredictable, unevenly-weighted, impossible to follow.
A fixed format means fans know exactly what's on the table going forward — you don't have to guess how the bracket shakes out. It's clear who you'll play depending on where you finish.
Splitting the field this way heavily reduces the gap in strength within any given group, which is what makes so many more matches genuinely competitive — without shrinking the tournament or cutting anyone out. The format isn't perfect, but it's about as close as this gets, in my opinion.