There are tournaments remembered for a goal, a final, a player. The 2026 World Cup will be remembered for something bigger: the moment football stopped being the world’s most popular sport to definitively become its largest business platform. And that didn’t happen by chance — it happened because everything in this tournament was designed for it to be so.
Read more Earthquake in Peru today, Thursday, July 23: what was the magnitude and epicenter according to IGP
The starting point was expansion. For the first time in history, the tournament grew from 32 to 48 teams, with a total of 104 matches played in 16 cities across the United States, Mexico, and Canada — including Mexico City, Guadalajara, Monterrey, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York. This decision was questioned by purists. What no one clearly anticipated is that it also means more weeks of content, more emotionally involved markets, and a commercial machine that practically doubled in scale. The result: FIFA’s 2023–2026 commercial cycle will reach 13 billion dollars — a 73% increase compared to the previous cycle — while the World Cup’s brand value reached 5.2 billion dollars in 2026 according to Brand Finance, a 244% growth from the 1.5 billion recorded in South Africa 2010.
But none of those numbers alone explains what happened in the United States.
The match between the United States and Belgium in the round of 16 registered 30 million viewers on Fox — the most-watched football broadcast in US history. Adding Fox and Telemundo, that match reached 42 million Americans simultaneously. To put it in perspective: knockout round matches in this World Cup competed head-to-head with the most-watched sporting events in North American culture. We’re not even comparing the finals. These figures are not just a sports record — they are the central argument for the next television rights negotiation. Broadcasters who paid more than 4 billion dollars for the rights to this tournament already have evidence that football in North America is a proven, not emerging, market.
The tournament also introduced changes that ignited debate about the game’s identity. For the first time in World Cup history, FIFA implemented mandatory three-minute hydration breaks in each half — regardless of the stadium’s temperature or weather conditions. Several coaches pointed out that the breaks were fragmenting the match’s rhythm, turning the 90 minutes into something more akin to four quarters than two halves. Fans in several stadiums booed the interruptions. Cynics saw them as a disguised advertising window. Pragmatists accepted them as the price of playing in the North American summer. No one was indifferent.
And then there’s the final’s halftime show. Madonna, BTS, Justin Bieber, Shakira with Burna Boy, and Gustavo Dudamel starred in the first musical spectacle in the history of a World Cup final, in a production curated by Chris Martin of Coldplay that included The Muppets, a children’s choir from Staten Island, and Brazilians Ronaldo and Ronaldinho escorting Madonna from the tunnel. The break lasted 27 minutes in total. Reactions were widely positive: media worldwide praised its ambition, its global representation — with artists from six continents on the same stage — and the message of unity with which it closed, with the field forming the word “Love” as artists and children sang together. What was once a mandatory break became an event within the event. Football had just shown that it can build a cultural spectacle comparable in scale to the Super Bowl.
Read more Earthquake in Chile today, Thursday, July 23: magnitude and epicenter report via CSN
All of this together forms a very clear pattern for anyone analyzing it from the industry perspective: the 2026 World Cup was not just a sporting tournament. It was the conscious launch of a new product. A product designed for mass audiences in the world’s most powerful market, with more matches, more commercial breaks, more peripheral entertainment, and more money flowing in all directions.
The champion will receive 50 million dollars in prize money, while the total pool of 871 million — 65% more than in Qatar 2022 — will be distributed among the 48 participating federations. Each national team is guaranteed at least 12.5 million dollars just for qualifying, regardless of their on-field results. That money does not stay with FIFA. It goes down to federations, to development programs, to sports infrastructure in countries that historically have not had access to those resources. The argument that the commercialization of football goes against the sport finds its most concrete counterweight here.
What remains open — and it is the question football will have to answer in the coming years — is whether all this strengthens or dilutes the essence of the game. Is football with mandatory breaks, a 27-minute halftime, and 104 matches still the same sport that captivated billions of people worldwide? Or are we facing the inevitable evolution of a product that needed to adapt to the planet’s largest market to continue growing?
The answer, probably, depends on where you stand. If you’re a lifelong fan, something was lost. If you’re a child in Chincha, Bogotá, or Manila who for the first time will receive a football pitch financed with tournament funds, something was gained.
Football has always had that tension. What’s new is that it has never before moved so much money while having it.