Is Football Ready for a Super Bowl Style Halftime Show at the 2026 World Cup?
FIFA's announcement last week has sparked widespread debate, excitement in some quarters and deep scepticism in others who see it as an unnecessary Americanization of the beautiful game
Haven't subscribed yet? Join our community of sports enthusiasts eager to broaden their understanding of global sports. Whether you're a student, professional, or business owner, our newsletter provides invaluable insights into the sports industry.
The countdown to the 2026 FIFA World Cup is ticking, and with it comes one of the most talked-about changes in the tournament’s history. For the first time ever, the World Cup final will feature a halftime show. Announced by FIFA President Gianni Infantino, this bold addition is set to debut at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey on July 19, 2026. According to Infantino, this initiative is part of an effort to make the final “a show befitting the biggest sporting event in the world,” and he’s promised an unforgettable spectacle in partnership with Global Citizen. Early reports hint at Coldplay’s involvement in curating the lineup, while speculation swirls around high-profile performers like Shakira, Taylor Swift, and Lady Gaga. The move, undoubtedly, is aimed at bringing an added layer of entertainment to the tournament and enticing a broader audience to tune in.
But why is FIFA introducing this now? The answer lies in the unique opportunity presented by hosting the tournament in North America, where sports and entertainment have long been inseparable. FIFA seems eager to tap into the “Super Bowl effect,” where a game becomes more than just a sporting contest; it transforms into a global pop culture event. In the United States, the Super Bowl halftime show attracts millions of casual viewers who often tune in just for the performance, regardless of their interest in American football. FIFA’s leadership hopes to replicate that magic on soccer’s grandest stage. Casino.org’s recent survey suggests that they might be onto something. 82% of respondents, largely from the U.S., support the halftime show concept, believing it will enhance the overall experience of the final.
From a sports marketing perspective, the logic is easy to follow. The World Cup is already the most-watched sporting event on the planet, but FIFA sees an opportunity to extend its appeal beyond the core football audience. A star-studded halftime performance could reel in more casual viewers, boost advertising revenues, and attract bigger sponsors. In a media landscape where attention is currency, creating viral moments with music and celebrity appearances could broaden the tournament’s reach in markets where football isn’t the dominant sport. The potential financial upside is enormous – if FIFA can mirror the Super Bowl model, they stand to increase engagement, sell more sponsorship packages and ultimately generate more income that, in theory, gets redistributed to grow the game globally.
However, this isn’t without significant risks. One of the most obvious concerns is the potential impact on the sporting integrity of the match itself. Football players are trained to operate within the strict rhythms of the game, and halftime is a tightly regimented 15-minute window designed for physical recovery, tactical adjustments, mental refocusing and even for substitutes to use the field to warm up. Extending the break for a concert, as was done during the 2024 Copa América final when Shakira performed, has already led to complaints. Colombia’s coach, Nestor Lorenzo, openly criticised the extended halftime, arguing it disrupted his team’s momentum and affected player performance. In a sport where every second and every small detail can tip the balance, messing with the routine is a serious gamble.
Another major concern is the logistical challenge. Football pitches aren’t built for quick-change entertainment. Unlike NFL stadiums, which often use artificial turf and have infrastructure designed to accommodate elaborate halftime spectacles, football stadiums must prioritise the integrity of the grass surface. Staging and dismantling a performance area in a matter of minutes while ensuring no damage to the field is a monumental task. There’s also the concern of extending halftime beyond what the rules allow. FIFA may push for a dazzling show, but according to the Laws of the Game, the interval between halves must not exceed 15 minutes. This rule isn’t just about tradition, it’s grounded in the physical demands of the sport. The International Football Association Board (IFAB) sets those standards, and extending halftime without their blessing would cross a line that many in the sport are unwilling to breach.
For many fans, particularly outside the U.S., the move feels like an unnecessary Americanization of the game they love. Football culture in Europe, South America, Africa, and much of Asia is deeply rooted in tradition. Fans tune in to watch the game itself, not the spectacle around it. Reddit threads are brimming with frustration about previous attempts to inject pop concerts into football events. Many cite the lukewarm reception of Camila Cabello’s performance before the 2022 UEFA Champions League final, which delayed the match and added little to the occasion. Even Shakira’s halftime show during Copa América, despite her strong footballing ties, drew criticism for distracting from the main event. For many, halftime is a sacred time for analysis, punditry and reflection on the match – not a time to watch a pop concert.
There’s also the perception that FIFA’s primary motivation is financial rather than fan-focused. Critics argue that the halftime show is just another way for the organisation to squeeze more money out of the sport, as they’ve done increasingly over the years. While Infantino and FIFA argue that increased revenues help support football development around the world, sceptics point to FIFA’s checkered history with corruption and question whether those funds are always used as promised. Some see the halftime show as symbolic of a broader trend where tradition and authenticity are sacrificed at the altar of commercialisation.
Even among those who are open to the idea, there’s an understanding that any halftime show must respect the game’s integrity. ESPN journalist Luis Miguel Echegaray summarised it perfectly: if FIFA wants to put on a show, then fine, but it must stay within the 15-minute limit. That’s the line that cannot be crossed. Otherwise, they risk disrupting the very nature of the game. Players can’t be expected to cool down and warm up repeatedly while a stage is set up and dismantled. If FIFA insists on a performance, it needs to be streamlined, with minimal setup, perhaps even performed from the stands or a suspended platform. Whatever it takes to avoid interfering with the match.
Ultimately, FIFA’s decision to introduce a halftime show at the 2026 World Cup final is a balancing act between evolution and erosion. From a marketing perspective, it’s a smart way to broaden the event’s appeal and tap into a lucrative music and pop entertainment-driven market. But if not handled carefully, it risks alienating the game’s most loyal fans and compromising the sporting purity that makes football beloved across the globe.
As the plans unfold over the next year, FIFA will have to navigate this fine line delicately. The world will be watching not just the match but how FIFA treats the game’s traditions. For many, football doesn’t need added glitter or celebrity distractions. It’s already the beautiful game: a ball, two goals, and the hopes of nations colliding on the pitch. That’s what fans are here for and FIFA would do well to remember it.
Some housekeeping stuff
If you can’t find the newsletter, check your Spam folder or Promotions tab, and move this email to your primary inbox. Make sure to mark this email address as ‘not spam’.
Today’s recommended podcast…
In this podcast episode of
, the discussion will dive into an eye-opening growing credibility challenge in the sports sponsorship industry. Drawing from new research by The Gemba Group, the conversation explores how conflicts of interest can arise when agencies are both advising brands on where to invest and selling sponsorship rights for the same properties. This dual role can lead to biased recommendations, undermining trust in the process.The episode also examines the rising influence of procurement departments in sponsorship decisions, pushing for greater transparency, accountability, and value for money. Listeners will hear insights on why better analytical tools are needed to evaluate sponsorship opportunities objectively and how these tools can help build more informed, data-driven partnerships.
Throughout the discussion, the focus remains on the bigger picture: fostering long-term, sustainable relationships between brands and rights holders.