World Cup Day 5: The Blowouts Are Here

I'm not sure I believe there's a good answer for "How many teams is the right number of teams for the World Cup finals" if the question is about inclusion and competition and not about the logistical problem of holding more than 100 games.

It's also difficult to uncouple my feelings about the size of the tournament from the blatant money grab inherent in expanding it. This FIFA is not cut from a different cloth when it comes to maximizing capital extraction from a host nation (Rest In Pain, Joao Havelange), but it has taken the pure avarice to unprecedented levels. That makes it hard to accept the growth of the World Cup field because doing so feels like validating FIFA.

The argument for expansion that isn't "more matches, more money" is that more nations gaining access to the biggest stage in world sport means massive steps forward for the game in those countries. A dream that cannot be achieved is limited as a means for driving interest and investment and I think it's undeniable that reaching the World Cup can be transformative for smaller and lesser resourced countries. If there's anything good that Sepp Blatter did while serving as president, it's that he entrenched within FIFA the idea that the body had a core responsibility to lift up the game in often forgotten or ignored places.

The part where he sacrificed any principles of human rights and associations with those who restrict them on that altar is tough to get past and his campaign clearly created the environment where Infantino now thrives is difficult to get past.

We witnessed the both sides of the expanded field coin Day 4 of this World Cup when footballing powerhouse Germany crushed the smallest nation to ever reach the World Cup finals, Curacao, 7-1. Although the Germans scored early and appeared to be on their way to the rout the whole world expected, Curacao managed to not only hold their own, but score the nation's first-ever World Cup goal.

No matter the ultimate scoreline, that goal made the whole exercise worth it for the Caribbeans.

Of course, things unraveled from there for Curacao and Germany ultimately put up a pretty grotesque number of tallies from six different goal scorers. Cue the gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands over the ugliness of the margin and what it says about the bigger, but maybe not better, 48-team World Cup.

I don't think I'm there. There probably is a version of the World Cup that is "too big" and that version might be anything bigger than the version we're currently engaged with now.

Sixty-four teams would be cleaner as a means to hold a group stage that ends with 32 teams eliminated and move onto a simple knockout bracket. It would definitely mean some blowouts like the one we witnessed in Houston. As I write this, Spain is getting ready to kickoff against Cape Verde and there I'm a little worried for the debutantes from the islands off the coast of Africa.

But I also don't know that I want to accept that the World Cup is locked off for a certain set of countries, many of them soccer-mad, and I don't know how you help those countries make significant strides in the access and quality of their soccer without making the dream of playing on the biggest possible stage a real possibility.

Should we be precious about the quality on display at the World Cup? Should we listen to the grayhairs who rant and rave about the modern World Cup being a shadow of the tournaments they watched as kids in years long passed?

Or should we accept that change is inevitable and find new ways to engage with the World Cup—like celebrating an island nation of 160,000 scoring a goal against the four-time World Cup champions in front a crowd of 70,000 people?

PROGRAMMING NOTE

We did Morning Kickaround this morning and got into some World Cup topics, including the outlook for the USMNT. Check it out.

I'm on the radio at 3 PM ET with Eric Wynalda today. Come by.

See you tomorrow.