The global soccer landscape is about to make a massive shift. Or at least the reckoning brought on by FIFA President Gianni Infantino's failed attempt to privatize the World Cup should lead to a massive wake-up call to everyone involved.

And Infantino should be sacked since it's clear he doesn't have the honor to resign on his own accord for his shenanigans. What is clear now is that the majority of the people in charge of safeguarding the sport of soccer no longer have the game's best interest at heart.

But that's not the most interesting aspect of what has been going on in and around FIFA's member nations and confederations. CONCACAF (North and Central America and the Caribbean), UEFA (Europe) and the AFC (Asia) put out a joint statement:

U.S. Soccer reiterated a key piece of information in a separate post that the USSF, Canada, Central American and Caribbean sub-federations were all unanimous in the stance against Infantino's nonsense. And the trio of federations that make up 142 of the 211 total soccering/footballing countries basically dressing you down in a joint statement is about as brutal as it gets for someone without losing their job with immediate effect.

But notice that Mexico is missing, because they had a separate statement backing Infantino, which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has even loosely followed that federation over the years. Lack of player movement abroad has led to an inflated intra-league values in LigaMX, ongoing protests with the second division for abandoning rel/pro, and an organizational structure that on its best day seems antagonistic to their own mission of administering soccer in their own country.

Now, I want to be clear...what Infantino did goes beyond Mexico and the USSF trying to make a lot of money off friendlies, inventing new competitions to congest the domestic schedules, or jacking up prices for tickets and visas, etc., for the last decade and last month at the World Cup. U.S. Soccer is not blameless in this crisis when this slide exists as a positive account of how the federation sets ticket prices which came long before the current political administration and FIFA president started to have a bromance.

But there is a small sliver of reasoning, or at least internet conspiracy theories, that Mexico is supporting Infantino so that they can join CONMEBOL, South America's footballing federation. Apparently this might not be a new thing, but as an outsider looking into the recent and current workings of the FMF/LigaMX, I could buy this line of thinking from them so far as it certainly gets talked about at the bar after the meetings.

I do not think this is likely to happen for a variety of reasons, but the majority of it being financial...why would Mexico lock itself out of playing games in the USA? Cause that's exactly what I would do as CONCACAF if El Tri left for the greener pastures down south.

No more playing friendlies in big U.S. stadiums for big revenue for a fanbase of diehards that would dwarf USMNT fans on their best day, regardless of whatever current agreement they have with Soccer United Marketing (SUM), who also need to get their leeching paws off of everything.

At no point should Mexico give up the massive financial opportunities they have being partnered with the USA and CONCACAF, but it is hilarious to think of what they would become in South America.

They would be Rutgers joining the Big Ten. Big promises, inflated self-market value being shifted away from their true fanbase, and the assumption that new rivalries and incomes would be made. Sure, Mexico would do just fine in CONMEBOL; they can muck up a qualifier with the best of them. But they would be an average fish in the big pond instead of the big fish in the little pond.

During the 2026 qualifying cycle in which Argentina were runaway winners...the gaggle of teams that qualified directly behind them in the Top six (Ecuador, Colombia, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay) all had about 7-8 wins and about the same number of draws, with four teams finishing on 28 points.

Surely El Tri could compete with that, and assuming South America potentially gets additional qualifying spots going forward, say eight out of their now eleven members, I would think more often than not that Mexico would be able to finish above the likes of Peru, Venezuela, and Bolivia on a regular basis. But the odds of Mexico having to qualify through the playoff as they did in 2014 or miss out altogether as the USA did in 2018 would surely go up substantially.

Most importantly, that every other year potential Gold Cup Final against the USA? Gone, replaced by what is to be an expected return to a once every four years Copa America. Additional potential matches against the USA and Canada in the Nations League? Also gone, replaced by a whole bunch of friendlies and an extended 20-game round-robin schedule against the entirety of CONEMBOL. And while there would surely be some fanfare with Mexico qualifying in a new region, I think that welcome would wear off fast.

If for even a microsecond Mexico thinks they would be better off in CONMEBOL, I would let them leave in a heartbeat. Because the ripple that would have across that federation over the next cycle or two would do more good for the sport in that country than hosting 10 consecutive World Cups.

The sooner more people realize that soccer is better when it makes decisions for other people's wallets first and its own second, the better the sport will be in the long run. Or you can be Rutgers that has lost over $500 MILLION since joining the Big Ten. True story, that actually happened and for the most part Rutgers has been a below-average college throwball team in their new conference and not once have they had a winning record in Big Ten conference play in the decade or so since joining.

Since the decision to move to the Big Ten was predicated almost solely on football, it's about the best comparison I can make to a potential Mexico move to CONEMBOL. It's probably a bad decision, but if CONMEBOL or FIFA is offering a better share of media rights or something, then on paper it's a great decision. Until it's not.

And to be fair to Rutgers, they were operating at a loss in the Big East as well, but in the process increasing their media rights paycheck sixfold (from about $10M in the Big East to $60M+ in the Big Ten), they've managed to double their annual debt per year since leaving the Big East thanks to massively increased expenditures in areas like travel and facilities.

So what would happen if Mexico actually went to CONMEBOL? For starters, I don't think they'd perform as badly as Rutgers on the field, so I don't think there would be as drastic a loss of revenue. But surely the loss on the friendlies being played in the USA alone would make an impact. Flying to ten away games a continent away for qualifying while losing a lot of games next door in the USA surely is going to add a hefty amount of red to the ledger, though travel in and around CONCACAF is not cheap or easy in its own right.

Next, the people at the top who think about their wallets first would be properly ostracized and removed from the sport at a far faster and needed rate so that people with better solutions and money management can come in and start actually using their federations' income and FIFA's multi-billion dollar reserves to do something more productive than sell off shares to private investors.

Soccer is the world's game, and without the world being involved in its decision-making, it is doomed to fail. There are many people at the highest level of national federations, elite clubs, etc., that have been making decisions that have been largely to their benefit and with little regard for the fan and paying customer.

And that line of thinking desperately needs to stop. Today.

Let's start with the man at the top who thought involving private equity firms and the World Cup was a good idea first...no, on second thought I want to see him let Mexico do this first, actually witness his decision-making leading to the downfall of one of his allies.

Infantino and FIFA and politicians actively learning that their self-centered decision-making processes have actual consequences when they don't think things through properly and make determinations solely about their wallets. Backroom dealings with a few elite persons should never be entertained over the interests of 200 member nations and national teams.

Let Gianni Infantino forever be known as the man who tried to ruin the Big East. I mean the World Cup.

Do I want five or six years of Mexico wandering the CONMEBOL Big Ten desert? I do not; it would cause irreparable harm to the USA-Mexico rivalry and CONCACAF as a whole. The on-field product CONCACAF would be putting out would be diminished for probably a decade at a minimum, but it would all but force the USSF and the confederation to rethink their ticketing and marketing policies.

But would I trade Mexico's foolish endeavor and search for a bigger payday in exchange for cheaper domestic tickets and solving a lot of problems facing football on a regional and global scale all in one go?

In a heartbeat.

Subscribe