Predicting the World Cup Using Football Manager

The World Cup is coming up, so it is time to start getting carried away. The big question, obviously, is who is going to win it. I have gone through every squad using the backend of Football Manager – the Football Manager real time editor – weighed up the quality at the top end, the depth underneath it and how those pieces fit together, then projected the whole tournament from the groups through to the final. Here is how I see it playing out, backed by science, more or less.

 

THE GROUP STAGE

Group A

1. South Korea
2. Mexico
3. Czechia
4. South Africa

I’d back South Korea to top this group, with Mexico finishing second, Czechia third and South Africa fourth. South Korea have the best top-end quality by a clear margin. Son Heung-min, Kim Min-jae and Lee Kang-in give them a level of star power the others cannot quite match, and in international football that kind of elite core often matters more than perfect depth across every position.

Mexico are probably the deepest and most balanced side in the group, with a lot of solid players spread through the squad, which should make them reliable across three matches. Home advantage helps too. The issue is that, while they look sturdy all over, they do not quite have the same match-winning ceiling as South Korea. Czechia look organised and well-rounded, with Schick, Soucek, Coufal, Krejci and Vitík giving them a decent spine, but the overall level feels slightly below Mexico’s. South Africa look the weakest of the four.

Group B

1. Switzerland
2. Canada
3. Bosnia and Herzegovina
4. Qatar

Switzerland look the clear favourites to win this group. They have the strongest blend of quality, experience and depth, with Gregor Kobel, Yann Sommer, Manuel Akanji, Granit Xhaka and Denis Zakaria forming a spine the other sides simply cannot match. Beyond the headline names, they also have dependable players throughout the squad, which makes them far less reliant on one or two individuals dragging them through games.

Canada should finish second thanks to the quality of Alphonso Davies and Jonathan David, who give them the second-highest ceiling in the group. After that, though, the squad drops off too much compared with Switzerland. Bosnia have a few decent players and some useful experience, but they look thinner and older overall. Qatar are clearly fourth on squad strength.

Group C

1. Brazil
2. Morocco
3. Scotland
4. Haiti

Brazil should win this group comfortably. Their squad is operating on a completely different level to the other three, both in terms of elite talent and depth. Alisson, Vinícius Júnior, Raphinha, Bruno Guimarães, Marquinhos, Rodrygo, Gabriel and Bremer give them top-class quality right across the pitch, and even their supporting cast would improve most other nations.

Morocco are the obvious second-best side. Achraf Hakimi, Yassine Bounou, Noussair Mazraoui and Brahim Díaz give them genuine high-level talent, and there is enough quality around them to make the team look balanced and dangerous. Scotland have some very good individuals in Robertson, McTominay, McGinn and Gilmour, but the drop-off after that is bigger and the overall ceiling is lower than Morocco’s. Haiti are comfortably fourth.

Group D

1. Türkiye
2. United States
3. Paraguay
4. Australia

I’d have Türkiye finishing top here. They have the strongest blend of current quality, depth and match-winners, with Hakan Çalhanoğlu and Kenan Yıldız giving them real class at the top end. Add in Arda Güler, Ferdi Kadıoğlu, Orkun Kökçü, Can Uzun and Merih Demiral and it feels like the quality is spread across the squad rather than vanishing after the first few names.

The United States are also strong and should come second. Pulisic, McKennie, Adams, Tillman, Cardoso and Robinson give them a very solid core, but Türkiye’s overall ceiling looks slightly higher. Paraguay have some useful players and enough balance to stay competitive, though they lack the same volume of top-end quality. Australia look the weakest of the four.

Group E

1. Germany
2. Ivory Coast
3. Ecuador
4. Curaçao

Germany should top this group comfortably. Kimmich, Wirtz, Musiala, Rüdiger, Tah, Schlotterbeck, Havertz and Sané give them elite players all over the pitch, and even their depth options are at a level the rest of the group cannot really live with.

Ivory Coast look the strongest challengers. They have a very good mix of power, athleticism and technical quality through players such as Kessié, Sangaré, Amad, N’Dicka, Kossounou, Singo and the Diomandés. Ecuador have an excellent spine in Caicedo, Hincapié and Pacho, but after that the squad falls away more than Ivory Coast’s does. Curaçao are clearly fourth.

Group F

1. Netherlands
2. Japan
3. Sweden
4. Tunisia

The Netherlands are comfortably the strongest team in this group and should finish first. Van Dijk, Frenkie de Jong, Gakpo, Xavi Simons, Reijnders, Timber, Frimpong, Van de Ven, Botman and De Ligt is an absurd amount of quality for one international squad, and they look strong in just about every area.

Japan edge second for me. They may not have the same superstar punch as Sweden in attack, but they look more balanced across the squad and better suited to consistently getting results over three games. Mitoma, Kubo, Doan, Endo and Tomiyasu give them a strong technical base and plenty of structure. Sweden have real match-winners in Isak, Gyökeres and Kulusevski, which makes them dangerous, but the squad as a whole feels less complete. Tunisia are fourth, lacking the depth and star quality to threaten the top three.

Group G

1. Belgium
2. Egypt
3. Iran
4. New Zealand

Belgium should finish top here without too many issues. Courtois, De Bruyne, Doku, Tielemans, Lukaku, Trossard, Onana and De Ketelaere give them a level of quality and depth that the other teams simply do not have.

Egypt come next because Mohamed Salah and Omar Marmoush immediately give them two of the best attacking players in the group outside Belgium. There is enough support around them to make them dangerous, even if the squad drops off after the headline names. Iran look solid and experienced, but their overall level is lower and they feel more functional than genuinely threatening. New Zealand are fourth, with Chris Wood standing out but not enough quality around him to lift the whole side.

Group H

1. Spain
2. Uruguay
3. Saudi Arabia
4. Cape Verde

Spain look miles clear at the top of this group. Rodri, Pedri and Lamine Yamal alone give them a ridiculous foundation, and when you add Nico Williams, Olmo, Zubimendi, Grimaldo, Fabián, Gavi, Oyarzabal and Raya, they have top-level players all over the squad.

Uruguay are the obvious second-best side. Valverde is world class, Araujo gives them an elite defender, and there is enough quality around them in Bentancur, Ugarte, Giménez and Darwin Núñez to make them highly competitive. Saudi Arabia have a few useful players, with Salem Al-Dawsari the standout, but the overall level drops off quite quickly. Cape Verde have some respectable individuals, though on pure squad strength they look the weakest of the four.

Group I

1. France
2. Norway
3. Senegal
4. Iraq

France are on a completely different tier to the rest of this group. Mbappé, Dembélé, Saliba, Tchouaméni, Camavinga, Maignan, Upamecano, Koundé and Olise give them world-class quality all over the pitch, and the depth behind that is ridiculous.

Norway should finish second because Haaland and Ødegaard alone give them a level of star quality Senegal cannot quite match. The supporting cast is decent enough to make them a genuine threat as well. Senegal are still strong, with Mané, Koulibaly, Nicolas Jackson, Sarr and Pape Gueye giving them athleticism, experience and quality, but they just fall short of Norway’s top-end firepower. Iraq are clearly fourth.

Group J

1. Argentina
2. Austria
3. Algeria
4. Jordan

Argentina should top this group. Messi, Lautaro Martínez, Julián Álvarez and Enzo Fernández already give them a world-class core, and there is still huge quality around them in Mac Allister, Emi Martínez, Romero, Lisandro Martínez, Dybala, Garnacho and Nico Paz.

Austria look the clear second-best side. They are well-rounded, organised and have a strong spread of quality through Laimer, Schlager, Alaba, Sabitzer, Baumgartner, Danso and Seiwald. Algeria have some very useful players in Mahrez, Bennacer, Aït-Nouri, Gouiri, Bensebaini and Amoura, but the squad feels a touch less complete than Austria’s. Jordan are fourth, with Musa Al-Tamari standing out but not enough support around him.

Group K

1. Portugal
2. Colombia
3. DR Congo
4. Uzbekistan

Portugal should win this group comfortably. Bruno Fernandes, Vitinha, Bernardo Silva, Rúben Dias, Nuno Mendes, João Neves, Rafael Leão and Diogo Costa give them elite quality throughout the squad, and their depth is far too strong for the others.

Colombia should come second. Luis Díaz is the standout player outside Portugal in this group, and there is enough support around him in Richard Ríos, Daniel Muñoz, Lucumí and Dávinson Sánchez to make them balanced and competitive. DR Congo edge third because they have a better spread of solid players, including Wissa, Mbemba, Wan-Bissaka and Sadiki. Uzbekistan have an outstanding asset in Khusanov, but the drop-off after him is steep enough that they still look the weakest overall.

Group L

1. England
2. Croatia
3. Ghana
4. Panama

England should finish top without much debate. Kane, Bellingham, Rice, Saka, Palmer, Foden, Stones, Trent and Reece James give them elite quality and depth right across the pitch, and they are clearly the strongest side in the group.

Croatia look the best of the rest. Even with some ageing stars, Modrić, Gvardiol, Kovačić, Brozović and Stanišić still give them a very strong spine, along with the sort of control and composure that usually matter in tournament football. Ghana have some dangerous attacking players in Kudus, Semenyo and Iñaki Williams, but they are not quite as complete as Croatia. Panama are fourth, with Murillo and Carrasquilla standing out but not enough quality across the rest of the squad.

 

Best Third-Placed Teams

Based on the strength of the 12 teams finishing third, these would be my eight best third-placed finishers: Sweden, Scotland, Senegal, Ecuador, Algeria, Ghana, Czechia and Paraguay.

The four missing out are Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iran, Saudi Arabia and DR Congo.

Sweden are one of the strongest third-placed teams because Isak, Kulusevski and Gyökeres give them more attacking firepower than most sides in this bracket. Scotland, Senegal, Ecuador, Algeria and Ghana all have enough quality in key areas to look more dangerous than the weaker third-place finishers, while Czechia are not spectacular but do look balanced and experienced enough to edge through. Paraguay probably take the final spot thanks to a slightly stronger overall spine than Bosnia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and DR Congo.

 

Round of 32

Mexico over Canada. Mexico have a more balanced squad across the full XI and bench, even if Canada have the bigger headline names. Alphonso Davies and Jonathan David can absolutely swing a knockout game, but Mexico’s deeper pool and home-soil factor make them the safer call.

Germany over Paraguay. One of the easier picks. Germany have far more top-end quality and far more depth, and there is too much difference between the squads for this to feel like a genuine toss-up.

Netherlands over Morocco. The Dutch squad looks deeper and more complete, especially when you stack up the number of high-level players across defence, midfield and attack. Morocco are dangerous enough to make this awkward, but the Netherlands still feel a touch stronger across the whole squad.

Brazil over Japan. Brazil are operating with a much higher ceiling than Japan, with more elite players and stronger depth behind them. Japan are organised and technically very good, but this feels like the kind of tie where Brazil simply have too many match-winners.

France over Sweden. France are the strongest team in the field on most measures. Sweden have serious attacking threat, but over 90 minutes France should have too much control, too much bench quality and too many players who can decide the game on their own.

Norway over Ivory Coast. One of the riskier picks, but the logic is obvious enough. If you have Haaland and Ødegaard backed by enough competence around them, that top-end quality can decide a knockout match. Ivory Coast are physically strong and full of athletes, but Norway’s best two players may be the most decisive figures in the tie.

South Korea over Scotland. South Korea look like the more dangerous tournament side because the top-end quality stands out more clearly. Son, Kim Min-jae and Lee Kang-in give them more genuine game-breaking class than Scotland, and that usually matters once margins get tight.

England over Senegal. England have more depth and a higher concentration of elite players across the pitch, which is what normally separates these ties. Senegal are strong enough to make it uncomfortable, but England’s overall squad ceiling is still clearly higher.

Türkiye over Ecuador. Türkiye have more attacking variety and more players capable of swinging matches from advanced areas. Ecuador are physically imposing and have an excellent spine, but I’d still just edge Türkiye because they look more likely to produce the decisive moment.

Belgium over Czechia. Belgium are not the all-conquering side they once were, but they still have more high-end talent than Czechia and more match-winners in the final third. This is not a landslide, though. Belgium are more vulnerable than their old reputation suggests.

Colombia over Croatia. Another tie that is far from straightforward. Croatia still have know-how and control, but there is a point where experience turns into age, and I think they are getting dangerously close to it. Colombia look fresher, quicker and better built for the intensity of this stage.

Spain over Austria. Spain are simply on a different level for depth, midfield control and technical quality. Austria are awkward, aggressive and tactically coherent under Rangnick, but this is still the kind of game where Spain should dominate the ball and eventually wear them down.

Switzerland over Algeria. Switzerland are one of those teams who rarely look glamorous but usually look complete, and that matters in knockout football. They have a stronger spine and fewer weak points than Algeria, which makes them the more trustworthy side in a tie like this.

Argentina over Uruguay. Argentina are deeper, more polished and more dangerous across different game states, which is why this is the right pick. Uruguay have enough bite and quality to make it ugly, but Argentina’s balance and higher-end talent should still carry them through.

Portugal over Ghana. Portugal are just too stacked for this one. Ghana have some exciting individuals, but the overall squad level, depth and control are nowhere near Portugal’s.

USA over Egypt. Another close one, but the case for the USA is that the squad is more complete from back to front, with better depth and more athletic coverage across the pitch. Egypt have the best individual attacker in the tie in Salah and enough quality to punish mistakes, yet the Americans look slightly more reliable over the full 90.

 

Round of 16

France over Germany. France are the pick because they have the stronger combination of elite starters and high-level support behind them. Germany are still dangerous and sit firmly in the top tier, but France have more game-changers across the pitch and a bit more margin for error if the match gets stretched.

Netherlands over Mexico. The Netherlands look stronger because they have more genuine top-end quality and fewer weak spots across the squad. Mexico are balanced, competitive and have the host factor on their side, but the Dutch still have the higher ceiling.

Brazil over Norway. This is the kind of tie where Norway’s star power gives them a chance, because Haaland and Ødegaard can make any game dangerous, but Brazil still look too strong overall. Norway can hurt them, yet Brazil have more routes to winning.

England over South Korea. England should have too much depth and too much quality across the full squad for South Korea over 90 minutes. South Korea have a strong core and enough star quality to be awkward, especially through Son, Kim Min-jae and Lee Kang-in, but England’s squad is stronger almost everywhere.

Spain over Colombia. Spain are the safer pick because they should have the deeper midfield, more technical control and more quality across the squad. Colombia are no soft touch and have enough pace and aggression to make this uncomfortable, but Spain’s command of games still makes them the more likely side to edge it.

Türkiye over Belgium. One of the bolder calls, but a defendable one. Türkiye have more in-form attacking weapons and a squad that looks younger and more dynamic overall. Belgium still have dangerous individuals, but they also feel like a team that can be played through and outrun in the wrong match-up.

Argentina over USA. This is where the United States’ run ends. Argentina have more elite talent, more proven tournament players and more quality spread across the squad. The USA are athletic and improving, but there is still a gap here in both experience and top-end class.

Portugal over Switzerland. Portugal look the stronger side because they have more top-class players, more depth in advanced areas and more match-winners capable of deciding a knockout game. Switzerland are usually organised and difficult to break down, but Portugal’s ceiling is clearly higher.

 

Quarter-finals

France over the Netherlands. France are the pick because this is the kind of tie where their bench matters almost as much as their starting XI. The Dutch have quality all over the pitch and enough athleticism to make it a proper game, but France simply have more ways to hurt you: more pace in transition, more one-v-one threat, more midfield power and more defenders who can survive being left exposed.

Spain over Türkiye. This is where the underdog run ends. Türkiye have enough attacking talent to make matches chaotic, but Spain are a nightmare quarter-final opponent because they do not just have better players, they have more control. If Türkiye want a transition game, Spain can pin them back. If they want to play through midfield, Spain are better there too.

England over Brazil. Probably the boldest call of the lot, but there is a real argument for it. Brazil still have terrifying names and more raw attacking improvisation than almost anyone, yet England’s pool feels better built for a tournament knockout game: more balance, more depth across defence and midfield, and fewer obvious structural compromises. The risk, obviously, is that Brazil only need one moment from Vinícius Júnior, Rodrygo or another elite attacker to flip the entire match.

Argentina over Portugal. This feels like a game decided by trust. Portugal might have the cleaner squad in certain areas and more depth in some attacking positions, but Argentina still look like the side you would back in a high-pressure knockout match because they are more settled, more streetwise and more comfortable winning ugly. If Portugal persist with Ronaldo, that only sharpens the concern, because there are ties at this level where the work without the ball matters as much as the brilliance with it.

 

Semi-finals

France over Spain. Brutally close, but I’d edge France. They have slightly more variety in how they can win the game: more explosive one-v-one players, more recovery pace at the back and a deeper bench for a semi-final that may swing after 70 minutes. Spain would probably have more possession; France would probably create the more dangerous moments. In a one-off semi-final, I trust that more.

Argentina over England. I’d take Argentina. England’s squad depth is ridiculous and, if you were picking a 23-man group for a month-long tournament, there is a strong case that they have more quality from player 12 down to player 20. Argentina, though, still look a bit more settled in their best XI and a bit more trustworthy in the spine that usually decides knockout matches. More specifically, they feel like the side less likely to lose their nerve or drift tactically in a huge game. England have the talent to beat anyone, but they are still easier to imagine dominating stretches without killing the match. Argentina are nastier in the right way: more streetwise, more comfortable in ugly periods and more convincing when a semi-final turns into a tense, bitty contest rather than an open showcase.

 

Final

France over Argentina. France’s revenge.

France against Argentina is about as close as you can get. The reason I’d still lean France is that they probably have slightly more variety in how they can win the game. Argentina’s best XI is outstanding and their spine is probably the more proven in this exact environment, but France have more explosive depth, more pace across the squad and more options if the final changes shape after an hour.

Argentina are still the team I would trust more to stay calm if the match becomes nasty, scrappy and emotionally charged. They are more streetwise, more comfortable without control and probably better at dragging a final into the sort of trench warfare elite knockout football often becomes. France, though, look just a touch more complete across the full group, and that is usually the edge I want in a final.

So my winner would be France, but not by much. Of all the knockout calls, this is the one I’d feel least comfortable calling clear-cut.

 

Check out our Feature Article Section for more FM26 Updates and Tips