The recently concluded Club World Cup in the United States was many things: a competitive showcase for elite football clubs, a chance to witness thrilling matchups, and perhaps most crucially a dress rehearsal for what could be the most ambitious World Cup in history. 

With 48 national teams set to compete across three countries, Mexico, Canada, and the US in 2026, FIFA quietly used the Club World Cup to test its logistics, infrastructure, and audience engagement.

But while the football delivered, the tournament also exposed deep cracks that can’t be ignored.

So what exactly did the Club World Cup reveal? What is it really telling us before the global spectacle kicks off in 2026?

The Weather is a threat

If there’s one message the Club World Cup screamed loud and clear, it’s this: the heat is real, and it’s not playing around.

During the tournament, temperatures in cities like New York soared to 39°C, with humidity pushing the heat index to over 50°C. It wasn’t just uncomfortable, it was dangerous. 

Players struggled, coaches complained, and even sniffer dogs had to wear Crocs to protect their paws from burning stadium pavements.

Lightning storms brought further chaos, delaying six matches, some by over two hours. For clubs like Chelsea and Benfica, a game delay in the 86th minute completely changed the energy and momentum, raising concerns about fairness and player safety. 

“It’s not football,” Chelsea boss Enzo Maresca said bluntly, questioning whether the US is the right place for such tournaments under these weather conditions.

Nine of the 16 cities selected for 2026 are flagged by global player union Fifpro as “very high” or “extremely high” risk zones for heat stress. 

If FIFA doesn’t seriously reconsider kickoff times or build more indoor venues with roofs, the physical toll on players could overshadow the football.

Stadium quality varies wildly

The Club World Cup offered a taste of what fans and teams might face in 2026: stunning venues on one hand, and frustrating logistical nightmares on the other.

Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta received praise for its futuristic roof and sleek design. So did Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia, with its surrounding sports complex and decent metro access. But elsewhere? It wasn’t so smooth.

MetLife Stadium in New Jersey slated to host the 2026 World Cup final had serious accessibility issues. Fans had to trek 20-30 minutes under scorching sun from the nearest train station to their seats. Post-game, there were no taxis or Ubers allowed near, forcing spectators to walk even further just to leave.

At Hard Rock Stadium in Miami, the lack of nearby public transport meant arriving three hours early was the only way to avoid chaos. Post-match, a curfew prevented car pickups near the stadium, making the entire experience exhausting for fans.

If FIFA wants to avoid massive PR disasters in 2026, it must prioritize fan mobility. Providing free transport for ticket holders like Qatar did in 2022 might be essential in a country not known for pedestrian-friendly infrastructure.

Grass isn’t always greener in the USA

Most US stadiums are built for American football, not world-class football. That means artificial surfaces covered by thin layers of temporary grass. The result? Inconsistent bounce, sticky passes, and strange ball movement.

Players didn’t hide their frustration. Jude Bellingham called out the poor quality of the pitches, while Borussia Dortmund manager Niko Kovac likened some surfaces to “golf greens” that made proper football impossible.

Even more worrying, some teams had to deal with drastically different grass conditions from one city to another. The lack of uniformity not only affects performance but also increases the risk of injury. 

FIFA has promised longer preparation times for 2026, but it’ll need to do far more than that if it wants to deliver a football experience worthy of the World Cup.

Security too intense

With former US President Donald Trump attending the final, security during the Club World Cup reached near-military levels. 

Snipers on rooftops, counter-terrorism squads, bomb-sniffing dogs, and multiple layers of bag checks created a fortress-like atmosphere especially at MetLife Stadium.

But even before the final, security was already tight. Armed officers, second-perimeter bag checks, and sniffer dogs became the norm at various venues, especially in Philadelphia and Orlando.

While safety is paramount especially in today’s climate, FIFA must ensure that heightened security doesn’t come at the cost of fan experience. Long lines and delays at security checkpoints risk creating frustration and reducing accessibility, especially for families, older fans, or people with disabilities.

Attendance sends mixed signals about American soccer culture

Attendance at the Club World Cup was all over the place. While the final between Chelsea and PSG attracted over 81,000 fans, some group-stage games had fewer than 4,000 in the stands. 

For context, fewer people came to see Mamelodi Sundowns play Ulsan HD than attend a minor league baseball game.

Timing was a major issue. Games scheduled for noon or 3 p.m. on weekdays meant many fans simply couldn’t make it, especially in a country where football still competes with sports like baseball and American football.

Ticket pricing added insult to injury. Some tickets were initially sold for over £250, only to drop to £10 a few days before kickoff. Fans who paid the full price early felt cheated, while others still chose to stay home due to high costs.

The lesson here is simple, the World Cup isn’t the Super Bowl. It needs community engagement, smarter marketing, and fan-friendly pricing especially in a country where the sport is still growing.

America’s love for football is still growing but it needs help

Walking into bars and restaurants across the host cities, one might expect TVs showing football everywhere. But more often, it was baseball, basketball, or even golf. Yes, football is growing in the US, but it’s still not front and center for the average American sports fan.

Many fans didn’t even know the Club World Cup was happening. Local journalists said it outright: FIFA needed to market the tournament better. “People aren’t staying away because they don’t care about soccer,” said American journalist Doug Roberson. 

“They’re staying away because they didn’t even know it mattered.” The takeaway? For the 2026 World Cup to be successful in the US, it has to feel like a cultural event—not just a sporting one.

What we should note

The Club World Cup wasn’t a failurem but it wasn’t a flawless triumph either. It was a mirror, showing FIFA the full picture of what’s to come if proper planning doesn’t happen.

From weather to transport, from pitch quality to public awareness, the tournament exposed the pressure points that could either make or break the 2026 World Cup.

This wasn’t just about club football, it was a warning shot. A real-time, real-world test that FIFA would be wise not to ignore. Because come 2026, there won’t be room for excuses. Will FIFA be ready?