The 2025 FIFA Club World Cup represents one of the most significant shifts in international club football in recent history. Expanding from a modest tournament featuring seven teams to a sprawling 32-team competition lasting four weeks, the event is poised to reshape the global football calendar. Hosted across 11 cities in the United States, this expanded format aims to increase the tournament’s commercial appeal and global reach. However, this ambitious expansion has sparked widespread criticism from players, leagues, clubs, and fans alike, primarily centered on concerns about player overload, fixture congestion, and fan fatigue. This analysis delves into the multifaceted aspects of the expanded Club World Cup, examining the structure, stakeholder reactions, and the broader implications for football’s future.
The New Format: Scale and Structure
The 2025 edition of the FIFA Club World Cup marks a dramatic departure from tradition. Instead of the usual seven teams—continental champions plus the host nation’s champion—the tournament will feature 32 teams competing over four weeks, from June 14 to July 13, 2025. Matches will be played across 11 cities in the United States, serving as a preparatory event for the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The tournament’s structure includes eight groups of four teams each, with the top two from each group advancing to a knockout stage beginning with the Round of 16. In total, 63 matches will be played.
Qualification is based on winning continental competitions during the four-year window from 2021 to 2024 or through club rankings. UEFA, the strongest confederation in club football, has been allocated 12 slots, while CONMEBOL receives 6, and AFC, CAF, and CONCACAF each have 4 slots. The OFC has 1 slot, and the host nation, the USA, has 1 guaranteed place. The awarding of the host nation’s slot to Inter Miami, despite not winning the MLS Cup, sparked controversy, with critics arguing that commercial considerations influenced the decision.
The tournament boasts a staggering US$1 billion prize pool, with the winner potentially earning up to US$125 million. Prize money is divided into three pillars: the sporting performance pillar (US$475 million), participation pillar (US$525 million), and solidarity payments (US$250 million) aimed at supporting football development worldwide. This financial incentive underscores FIFA’s commercial ambitions but also raises questions about the tournament’s impact on players and domestic competitions.
Player Welfare: The Human Cost of Expansion
Central to the criticism of the expanded Club World Cup is the issue of player welfare. The tournament’s timing in the summer, traditionally a rest period for players, combined with its length and intensity, threatens to exacerbate fixture congestion and increase injury risk. Players already face demanding schedules, balancing domestic leagues, continental tournaments, and international duties. Adding a month-long competition with up to seven matches for some teams places enormous physical and mental strain on athletes.
FIFPRO and the World Leagues Forum have been vocal in their opposition, warning that the expansion “worsens fixture congestion and increases injury risks.” This concern echoes previous statements from players and coaches about calendar saturation. For instance, Dani Carvajal has remarked, “It’s impossible to be at full capacity with 72 plus games… The quality of the game drops, and we suffer, along with our families.” Similarly, Pep Guardiola’s observation that “During 11 months it is games, games, games… We want to play football and enjoy it, but we have to reduce it. It’s too much” resonates strongly in the context of this expanded tournament.
The physical toll is compounded by the mental and emotional pressures players face. Extended periods away from home, constant travel, and the lack of guaranteed rest periods can lead to burnout. Marcelo Bielsa’s warning that “Ignoring the consequences of excessive games and travel will end in injuries for any player” remains relevant as the calendar becomes increasingly congested.
Impact on Domestic Leagues and Fans
The expanded Club World Cup’s implications extend beyond players to domestic leagues and fans. National leagues fear that the tournament will disrupt their calendars, leading to fixture pile-ups and forcing clubs to prioritize international commitments over domestic competitions. This disruption threatens the competitive balance and financial sustainability of leagues that rely heavily on consistent scheduling and fan engagement.
Richard Masters, CEO of the Premier League, has voiced concerns that the football calendar is reaching a tipping point, noting, “The feedback we have from players is that there is too much football being played and there is constant expansion.” Neil Doncaster, CEO of the Scottish Professional Football League, similarly observed, “Calendar congestion isn’t a fresh problem… we’ve reached a saturation point and it is becoming increasingly challenging to manage domestic competitions.”
Fans, too, face the risk of fatigue. The sheer volume of high-profile matches, combined with the timing of the Club World Cup during the traditional off-season, could dilute the excitement and prestige of both domestic and international competitions. Additionally, the tournament’s commercial strategies, such as dynamic ticket pricing and exclusive streaming deals (notably with DAZN), have drawn criticism for prioritizing revenue over accessibility and fan experience.
Commercial Ambitions and Political Controversies
FIFA’s expansion of the Club World Cup is undeniably driven by commercial interests. The US$1 billion prize pool, extensive broadcasting rights, and the use of multiple host cities across the United States reflect a strategy to maximize revenue and global exposure. The tournament also serves as a test run for the 2026 FIFA World Cup, further underscoring its political significance.
However, this commercial push has not been without controversy. The decision to award the host nation’s slot to Inter Miami, a club owned by David Beckham and with close ties to FIFA, rather than the MLS Cup champions, raised questions about fairness and transparency. Critics argue that FIFA’s commercial priorities risk overshadowing sporting merit and the integrity of competition.
FIFA defends the expansion as a necessary step to globalize club football and increase its commercial viability. The organization highlights the substantial prize money and solidarity payments as evidence of its commitment to supporting football development worldwide. Yet, this defense has done little to quell concerns from players, leagues, and fans who feel marginalized in the decision-making process.
Stakeholder Perspectives: A Divided Football World
The expanded Club World Cup has exposed deep divisions within the football community. FIFPRO and the World Leagues Forum stand united in their opposition, emphasizing player welfare and fixture congestion. European leagues and clubs share concerns about the disruption to domestic competitions and the economic risks posed by calendar saturation.
Players and coaches, while not all having publicly commented on the 2025 tournament specifically, have long expressed unease about excessive match loads. Their voices, represented by figures like Dani Carvajal and Pep Guardiola, highlight the human cost of football’s relentless expansion.
FIFA, meanwhile, maintains that the new format benefits the sport globally. The organization points to the unanimous approval of the calendar by the FIFA Council and stresses the importance of commercial growth to sustain football’s future. However, FIFA’s accusation of “commercial self-interest” and “hypocrisy” directed at some leagues reveals the tensions and mistrust that have surfaced.
Broader Implications for Football’s Future
The controversy surrounding the expanded Club World Cup is emblematic of broader challenges in football governance. The sport’s rapid globalization and commercialization have created complex dynamics that require cooperation among diverse stakeholders. FIFA’s top-down approach, characterized by unilateral decision-making and commercial expansion, risks alienating key partners and destabilizing the football ecosystem.
Kylian Mbappe’s call for collaboration, “We need to find a balance between the interests of players, fans, and governing bodies,” encapsulates the need for a more inclusive governance model. Sustainable football demands transparency, shared decision-making, and respect for the welfare of all participants.
The expanded Club World Cup also raises fundamental questions about the future of international club competitions. While the tournament’s scale and prize money promise short-term commercial gains, the long-term consequences for player health, domestic leagues, and fan engagement remain uncertain.
Navigating the Crossroads of Football’s Evolution
FIFA’s expanded Club World Cup represents a bold vision for the future of club football, aiming to elevate the sport’s global profile and commercial potential. However, this ambition comes with significant risks. The tournament’s scale and scheduling threaten to overload players, disrupt domestic leagues, and alienate fans.
The voices of players like Dani Carvajal and coaches like Marcelo Bielsa remind us that football is ultimately about the people who play and love the game. The concerns of leagues and clubs underscore the importance of preserving the sport’s economic and social foundations.
As the football world grapples with these challenges, the path forward requires dialogue, compromise, and a commitment to sustainability. Only through collaborative governance can football navigate this pivotal moment and secure a vibrant, healthy future for the beautiful game.
