The 2025 FIFA Club World Cup, staged in the United States, was billed as a historic leap forward for club football—a grand convergence of the world’s top teams, players, and fans, with the promise of global spectacle and commercial success. Yet, as the tournament unfolded, images of empty seats and muted atmospheres dominated headlines, raising fundamental questions about FIFA’s vision, stakeholder engagement, and the very future of elite football competitions. This analysis explores the facts, figures, and perspectives that defined the event, critically examining the causes and implications of the underwhelming turnout and the broader debate it has sparked.
The Grand Vision: FIFA’s Ambitious Expansion
The New Format and Its Promise
The 2025 edition marked a radical shift for the Club World Cup—expanding from a seven-team format to a 32-team tournament, mirroring the scale of the men’s World Cup. The United States, with its world-class stadiums and burgeoning soccer market, was chosen as host, and FIFA invested heavily: over $50 million in promotion and a staggering $1 billion prize pot for participating clubs. The tournament was positioned as a “genuine World Cup featuring the top teams and elite players,” in the words of FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who repeatedly emphasized the event’s historic nature.
Attendance: The Numbers Behind the Narrative
Despite the grand ambitions, the reality in the stands was sobering. The average attendance hovered around 34,759 per match—a figure that, while respectable in isolation, paled in comparison to the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar (51,188 per group-stage match) and even the 2023-24 English Premier League (40,423). Over two million fans attended across 12 stadiums, but this was skewed by a handful of blockbuster matches. The largest crowd, 80,619, gathered for Paris Saint-Germain vs. Atlético de Madrid at the Rose Bowl, while other high-profile games—such as Real Madrid vs. CF Pachuca (70,248 in Charlotte) and PSG vs. Inter Miami (65,574 in Atlanta)—showed the tournament’s potential.
However, these peaks were offset by valleys: several matches, particularly those outside the marquee groupings, saw over 50,000 empty seats. Some games averaged as low as 17,000, and BBC Sport reported that for certain group-stage fixtures,
“There were more staff than fans.”
These numbers fueled criticism and skepticism about the tournament’s viability and global appeal.
Stakeholder Perspectives: Optimism, Criticism, and Realpolitik
FIFA’s Public Defense
Faced with mounting scrutiny, Gianni Infantino adopted a bullish stance.
“It’s a genuine World Cup featuring the top teams and elite players,”
he declared, repeatedly drawing parallels to the inaugural 1930 FIFA World Cup, which also struggled with attendance and logistics. Infantino insisted that
“our goal is full stadiums, and I am completely confident that we deserve that, considering the number of tickets sold so far and the demand for broadcasting rights; the audience will be present in full force.”
He also pointed to positive player feedback, claiming, “Players are loving it,” and specifically citing Harry Kane’s praise for the tournament’s atmosphere.
On the issue of ticketing, Infantino was candid about the challenges:
“We are sometimes criticized if prices are high, and at other times if they are low. We are trying to make the tournament accessible to everyone, especially students and young people.”
FIFA implemented a dynamic pricing system and made all matches free to stream globally on DAZN, in a bid to maximize accessibility and reach.
Clubs, Players, and the Player Welfare Debate
While FIFA projected confidence, many clubs and players voiced reservations. The expanded format, compressed schedule, and travel demands drew sharp criticism from the global players’ union FIFPro and the European Leagues, who warned of “increased player workload” and further congestion of the football calendar. A former UEFA official was blunt:
“This tournament was sold as a best-of-the-best—but instead it’s a B-list lineup with a few marquee names.”
The absence of superstars like Mohamed Salah and Cristiano Ronaldo, whether due to injury, club priorities, or other commitments, further undermined the event’s star power.
Players themselves were divided. Some, like Harry Kane, praised the atmosphere in matches involving passionate fanbases—
“the energy when Boca Juniors played was incredible,”
he told reporters—but others expressed frustration with extreme weather, delayed matches, and the relentless travel. The welfare debate became a flashpoint, with critics arguing that FIFA’s commercial ambitions were being prioritized over the health and performance of the game’s top athletes.
Fans and Local Engagement: A Missed Opportunity?
Perhaps the most damning criticism came from fans and local analysts. Despite FIFA’s promotional blitz, many US-based supporters felt disconnected from the event. A Seattle-based fan told Al Jazeera,
“It feels like FIFA dropped this on us with no local outreach.”
Local advertising was described as underwhelming, and the tournament struggled to compete with the NBA Finals, MLB season, and the Women’s Euro 2025 for attention. The qualification process was also criticized as opaque and not truly merit-based, with some strong clubs left out and others included for commercial reasons.
The absence of a compelling narrative, combined with the lack of global stars and the logistical challenges of hosting matches across vast distances, left many matches with muted atmospheres. As one analyst put it, “This was supposed to be a festival of football, but it feels more like a corporate experiment.”
Contextualizing the Criticism: Is the Club World Cup a Victim of Its Own Ambition?
Commercial Imperatives vs. Football Realities
At the heart of the Club World Cup’s struggles lies a fundamental tension between commercial ambition and footballing reality. FIFA’s decision to expand the tournament was driven by the twin goals of globalizing club football and unlocking new revenue streams. The United States, with its massive media market and modern infrastructure, was seen as the ideal launchpad for this vision. Yet, the execution revealed the limits of top-down, commercially driven expansion.
The event’s timing—smack in the middle of a crowded US sports calendar—meant it was always going to struggle for attention. The lack of local club allegiances, the absence of a clear qualification narrative, and the logistical challenges of traveling between distant cities all contributed to the subdued atmospheres. Even the most passionate football fans found it difficult to connect with a tournament that, in many cases, felt remote and impersonal.
The Player Welfare Conundrum
The expanded Club World Cup also reignited the debate over player welfare. With football’s calendar already bursting at the seams, the addition of another month-long tournament placed further strain on elite players. FIFPro and the European Leagues were unequivocal in their criticism, warning that the relentless schedule was unsustainable. “The players are being asked to do too much, and it’s only a matter of time before injuries and burnout become the norm,” a FIFPro spokesperson warned.
FIFA’s response—that the tournament offered a unique platform for players to showcase their talents on a global stage—rang hollow for many. The absence of several top stars, whether due to injury, rest, or club priorities, only underscored the disconnect between FIFA’s vision and the realities facing players and clubs.
The Question of Legacy
Infantino has argued that the 2025 Club World Cup should be seen as the start of a new era, not the finished product. “Perhaps some have a few reservations, but it’s a new experience. It’s something unique,” he said, urging patience and perspective. He pointed to the inaugural World Cup in 1930 as a precedent for slow starts and eventual success.
Yet, the question remains: can the Club World Cup ever become the global spectacle FIFA envisions, or is it destined to remain a secondary event, overshadowed by domestic leagues and the UEFA Champions League? The 2025 edition has exposed the challenges of building a truly global club competition from the top down, without the organic growth and local engagement that underpin the world’s most successful tournaments.
Lessons Learned and the Road Ahead
Reassessing the Model
The 2025 Club World Cup has provided a wealth of lessons for FIFA and its stakeholders. Chief among them is the need for greater local engagement and a more transparent, merit-based qualification process. Fans want to feel invested in the tournament, and that requires stories, rivalries, and a sense of authenticity that cannot be manufactured overnight.
FIFA must also grapple with the realities of the global football calendar. The welfare of players must be prioritized if the tournament is to attract the world’s best talent and avoid becoming a battleground between clubs, leagues, and governing bodies.
The Importance of Narrative and Star Power
The absence of global superstars and compelling narratives was keenly felt in 2025. If the Club World Cup is to succeed, it must find ways to ensure that the biggest names are present and that every match matters. This may require rethinking the qualification process, adjusting the timing of the tournament, or even exploring new formats that better align with the rhythms of the global game.
Commercial Success vs. Sporting Integrity
Finally, FIFA must strike a balance between commercial imperatives and sporting integrity. The temptation to prioritize revenue and global reach is understandable, but the long-term success of the Club World Cup will depend on its ability to win the hearts and minds of fans, players, and clubs alike. That requires humility, flexibility, and a willingness to learn from the missteps of 2025.
A Cautionary Tale or the Dawn of a New Era?
The 2025 FIFA Club World Cup will be remembered as a bold experiment—one that exposed the challenges of globalizing club football in an era of saturated calendars, divided loyalties, and shifting fan expectations. While the empty seats and muted atmospheres were a blow to FIFA’s ambitions, they also offer a valuable opportunity for reflection and recalibration.
As Infantino and his team look to the future, they would do well to heed the lessons of 2025: the importance of local engagement, the centrality of player welfare, and the need for authentic, compelling narratives. The road to a truly global Club World Cup may be longer and more complex than FIFA envisioned, but with the right adjustments, it remains a goal worth pursuing.
In the end, the fate of the Club World Cup will be decided not by grand pronouncements or billion-dollar investments, but by the passion of fans, the commitment of players, and the willingness of football’s leaders to listen, adapt, and evolve. The 2025 edition may have fallen short of its lofty ambitions, but it has set the stage for a vital debate about the future of the world’s most popular sport.
