The year 2026 comes with great expectations. Brazil will experience, as between 1970 and 1994, a 24-year fast without winning a World Cup. The national calendar has been transformed, financial fair play arrives with the expectation of controlling the spree of bad payers. I’m not an optimist by nature, I’m even a little afraid of creating euphoria for something that hasn’t happened yet and then being disappointed. I’m very far from being a jingoist – nothing against it, I even have friends who are. However, in fact, I don’t have the instinct to be absolutely critical of everything that is done in Brazil and Brazilian football.
Regarding the World Cup, the team is not a favorite, but I also don’t see Ancelotti’s team far behind its main opponents. Spain, due to its technical quality and strong game identity, starts as favourites. Argentina, due to the continuity of Lionel Scaloni’s work, also appears especially considered. Leo Messi’s age and the somewhat careless cycle (last date FIFA only played one friendly match, for example) leave me feeling a little behind. Individually, France has more good players per position than Brazil. Furthermore, between individual pieces and collective performance, I place Brazil on a shelf with Germany and England, followed by Morocco, Ecuador and the Netherlands.
In other words, being among the four or five best teams in the World Cup is a sign of being alive in the dispute, and a good month, combined with an (always necessary) dose of luck, leaves Brazil among those tipped to be champions.
In the national territory, the change in calendar is positive. Reducing the dates of the state championships and the Copa do Brasil reduces uninteresting games, while also helping to reduce the margin of error. Teams that play the Libertadores will play six fewer games per year if they play everything possible. The rest of Serie A will play eight fewer matches. That’s almost two months of fewer midweek games. At the same time, the regional cups guarantee more calendar to reward teams from the interior that perform well in the state. Series D with 32 more clubs also makes the tournament more plural and fills the year of the little ones.
It is important that the big players play less, with more quality games. It is equally important that minors play more often and not be left without something to play for several months of the year. A club like Uberlândia, just to cite a random example, could play 16 more matches in 2026. This is a sign of employment and livelihood for an important part of the Brazilian football industry.
Another new feature will be the implementation of financial fair play. Something is very problematic here, which is allowing the SAFs to spend what the clubs do not generate in revenue. Creating a mechanism to monitor and punish institutions that spend more than they earn, forcing clubs to be responsible in paying salaries and to their creditors are also positive points. But the concept of fair play is that the game is fair. And it’s not fair that Ceará fights to avoid falling by spending only what its budget allows while Rafael Menin, one of the owners of Atlético Mineiro, admits that to be competitive in recent years the club has invested more than it could, otherwise “it would have to work with Ceará’s budget”.
The championship must be played on the field by teams that have been assembled responsibly. Fair play improves some points, but it doesn’t prevent Brazil from having a “whoever has a richer father can do more” tournament.
I know that entering 2026 with the right foot, both feet or the left foot is something that is too controversial for some, but in my view we are capable of, whatever foot it is, taking steps and passes forward in this new year.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
