Title: Is the 2026 FIFA World Cup a Model for the Future? A Sports Executive Weighs In.

This summer, Bobby Goldwater will pay close attention to the 2026 FIFA World Cup. But unlike the billions of people who will likely watch the matches, Goldwater is keeping his eye on details other than the ball.

“Nine of the 16 World Cup stadiums have installed natural grass for the tournament. Most have used either a mix of Kentucky bluegrass and ryegrass or Bermuda grass. One has used just Kentucky bluegrass,” said Goldwater, a sports executive who teaches in the School of Continuing Studies. “Was everything installed properly? Is everything irrigated properly? How is the playing surface performing for these world-class athletes? These are the types of things that I look for.”

With the World Cup comes immense logistical and operational hurdles, from venue management to ticketing models and sponsorship opportunities. This year, the challenges come with the extra layer of teams playing across the U.S., Mexico and Canada — the first World Cup to be co-hosted by three countries.

Goldwater is familiar with many of the big-picture challenges and minute details that go into planning international mega sporting events like the World Cup. Prior to Georgetown, he held executive roles at Madison Square Garden and Staples Center and served as president and executive director of the DC Sports and Entertainment Commission. He also operated RFK Stadium, the home of the D.C. United and the Washington Freedom soccer teams, and was a consultant for the Concacaf Gold Cup men’s international soccer tournament for several years.

The challenges Goldwater thinks about are among the subjects students in Georgetown’s new Executive Master’s in Global Sports Operations & Strategy program will learn to navigate. The program, in collaboration with the Manchester City Sports Business School, will offer students first-hand insights from professionals at the cutting-edge of the global sports industry with online asynchronous courses and two one-week residencies in Manchester and London in the United Kingdom and in Washington, DC, and New York City.

“We are not just focusing on soccer. There are other global sports that we are going to explore to examine how things are done and why things are done,” said Goldwater, the faculty director of the program. “We will provide access for students that they will not be able to get any other way.”

We sat down with Goldwater to pick his brain on the major decisions behind the 2026 FIFA World Cup and what he’s keeping tabs on.

Ask a Professor: The Co-Hosting Model and the Future of Soccer and the Sports Industry

What prompted the decision to have three countries co-host the World Cup?

A Georgetown colleague of mine has called this year’s tournament a World Cup of firsts, and it certainly is. This is one of those firsts, that there will be three countries co-hosting. FIFA has a number of reasons for doing this. One, because of this combination of hosts in North America, they’re expecting, frankly, record-breaking profits, so some of this is purely financial. 

FIFA likes to be in a situation where it is building unity. So to have the U.S., Mexico and Canada all working together — the three countries are all in the Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football — it’s important to FIFA that this is going to promote North American unity.

They also have the great benefit of having three countries with established infrastructure. There are world-class venues involved. There are 16 stadiums hosting World Cup games here in North America, so there has been minimal construction. No venues had to be built as there have been in other countries, in some cases shamelessly overspending to build venues that had very little use after a World Cup, such as Brazil.

There are also logistical benefits. There are transportation systems. There are hotels. The tournament has expanded to 48 teams, so 16 additional teams and 40 more matches. These three countries can accommodate the number of teams and fans that are coming.

Does choosing countries that have established infrastructure risk alienating developing countries that don’t?

It might frustrate some countries, but look at what has happened. There have been a number of countries that have overspent and are going to suffer from financial mismanagement for years to come. Maybe there’s a country that is not financially ready to be a major host but could partner with others and participate in some way

Personally, I think the Olympics should find some combination of countries and just rotate the Olympics, find different parts of the world and keep going back to the same places. It will save money. It will make things more profitable. It certainly will create a greater legacy and contribute to sustainability.

Doesn’t co-hosting create more complexities and challenges?

There’s an important difference from how things have been done previously. In the past, FIFA would send a request for proposal, and countries would respond. Now, FIFA is working on a joint venture with the host countries and is managing the logistics and operations. FIFA is running things. 

FIFA has selected the training facilities. They’ve selected how teams are going to be transported and all those details — hospitality, ticketing and sponsorship. They’re going to coordinate things like security, immigration and other support services with host countries, but FIFA is in charge. FIFA thinks this is going to be much more efficient and also as profitable as possible.

Do you believe this model of co-hosting will continue?

FIFA has announced it is going to have a co-hosting model in 2030 and likely beyond. In 2030, Morocco, Spain and Portugal are going to be the primary hosts, and there’s going to be one match each in Uruguay, Paraguay and Argentina. I believe we are going to see this happening more and more with other mega events like the Olympics.

If you look at the Winter Olympics in Italy, there was not one host city. There were two host cities, so they shared logistical challenges, operational challenges and costs. It wound up being very positive from the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) perspective.

How do large-scale international events like the World Cup impact host cities and countries?

The citizens of these cities often have mixed feelings. Many of these communities welcome the attention and image enhancement for the city and the potential economic impact. There are some significant benefits — fans coming from all over to explore a city, learning about it and hopefully having a great time and coming back.

On the other hand, people who live in these cities fear increased traffic and some of the other nuisances that happen. The routine of a city changes for the length of time that a mega event is taking place.

As an example, the impact of the World Cup on host communities and FIFA’s management authority are on full display in the New York/New Jersey market. 

There will be eight matches, including the World Cup Final at MetLife Stadium, the home of the NFL’s Giants and Jets. Several premier venues around the country were vying to host the championship match, and FIFA selected MetLife because of its location in the U.S. media and business capital. The region also has the country’s largest population with soccer fans from every corner of the globe and a history of successfully staging major sports events, including international football.

On the other hand, FIFA’s decisions have frustrated fans and local citizens alike. There are extravagant prices for tickets to attend games and for public transportation. There will be no parking or tailgating for general fans in stadium lots, which will result in inconveniences, including people trying to park in nearby neighborhoods. Reduced commuter train service and traffic gridlock before, during and after matches are expected.

How does hosting a massive international event like the World Cup differ from a large domestic event like the Super Bowl?

You’re going to have more diversity of fans from a broader international audience. There’s going to be more multinational passion. The NFL has a strategy for globalization — the league is playing more regular-season games in more countries every year. They’re expanding, but they’re just in the relative infancy of globalization. I always describe the FIFA World Cup as the world’s most passionate event. People care about the Olympics, but there’s nothing that compares globally to the World Cup.

People invest their emotions before they invest their money when it comes to sports, which is why sports are so visible, because people care so much. That’s an asset the sports industry cherishes and needs to be a responsible steward for.

You can’t take fans for granted, which is why people who manage venues and organize events are so engaged with fans are committed to creating the best possible entertainment environment.

Soccer has been growing in popularity in the U.S. How do you expect the World Cup to shape the sport’s future in the U.S.?

It is certainly growing, and that’s the main point for the World Cup returning to the U.S. for the first time since 1994, when the World Cup was here last. Two years later, Major League Soccer was born, a direct result of the success of the FIFA World Cup. With that lesson, there is every opportunity to continue to grow the interest and the popularity of this sport.

Do sports executives in, for example, soccer, compete with and measure success against other sports like football?

Everybody pays attention to everybody else. Are they in great competition? I don’t know how many executives are saying, ‘Well, this year, our goal is to compete with the NFL.’ That might be unrealistic. Sometimes they borrow ideas from each other. That happens fairly often.

They want to do everything they can to get attention, generate more revenue, draw higher attendance and find more sponsors. Everybody wants to do everything they can for their own business and what they’ve identified as their goals and objectives. 

How would you compare the professional sports industry in the U.S. to other countries?

There are some practices that are done better in the U.S. than anywhere else. Our venues are better operated and managed than most other places in the world. I don’t think anybody does a better job than we do in sponsorships and providing activation opportunities for sponsors to give them exposure. 

But there are some things that are done great elsewhere in the world. We put on great golf tournaments, but so do other countries. Certainly, the passion and everything that comes with soccer continue to be aspirational here in our country.

Are you rooting for any particular team this World Cup?

Of course, it would be great if the U.S. advances further into the tournament than Team USA has before. That would be sensational. But I’d love to see a great final that elevates the sport. If the sport is elevated by a memorable championship match, our country will benefit as the host of the grand finale of the world’s most visible sports event.