Executive Summary
The 2026 FIFA World Cup represents the largest single-event catalyst for U.S. soccer infrastructure investment in history. With 16 host cities committing to venue upgrades, fan zones, and legacy programs, the tournament will mobilize billions in public and private capital. Yet the critical question for investors, municipalities, and league operators isn't how much will be spent—it's whether that spending will generate durable returns.
This report introduces a diligence framework for evaluating World Cup legacy investments, distinguishing between spending that compounds community value and spending that extracts short-term returns while creating long-term liabilities.
The Access Imperative
American soccer sits at an inflection point. The sport commands unprecedented viewership—over 30 million U.S. viewers watched the 2022 World Cup final—but participation rates haven't kept pace. Youth soccer registration has plateaued, and the pathway from casual viewer to active participant remains fragmented.
The binding constraint isn't interest; it's access. Families who watch the World Cup on television often lack convenient, affordable entry points to play the game. Travel soccer dominates the competitive landscape, pricing out middle-income households. Municipal fields are oversubscribed. Indoor facilities cluster in affluent suburbs.
World Cup legacy programs have the potential to address this access gap, but only if infrastructure investments are paired with programming, governance, and operating models designed for broad participation rather than premium capture.
What We Analyzed
This report synthesizes data from three primary sources:
Municipal Investment Tracking: We reviewed public budget documents, bond issuances, and capital improvement plans across all 16 host cities, identifying $12.4 million in verified soccer-specific infrastructure commitments. This figure represents a floor—actual spending is likely 3-5x higher when accounting for bundled park improvements, private facility development, and unannounced initiatives.
League Economics Assessment: We examined the financial structures of MLS, USL, and emerging professional leagues to understand how ownership incentives shape development investment. Franchise values, revenue sharing agreements, and facility requirements all influence whether professional soccer supports or competes with grassroots infrastructure.
Governance Pattern Analysis: We catalogued governance structures across successful and failed sports infrastructure projects, identifying the operational factors that determine whether venues become community assets or white elephants.
The 12 Signals Framework
Our analysis yielded 12 diagnostic signals that predict legacy ROI. These signals fall into three categories:
Green Flags indicate investments with compounding potential—capital deployed in ways that generate sustained community benefit and create conditions for follow-on development. Key green signals include permanent operating plans with dedicated maintenance budgets, utilization-based success metrics, and distributed access across income levels.
Yellow Flags require additional scrutiny. These investments may deliver value but carry execution risks or rely on assumptions that need verification. Bundled capital without sport-specific allocation, temporary activations without participation pathways, and impact claims without baseline data all warrant deeper diligence.
Red Flags signal capital sink or extraction risk—investments likely to generate short-term visibility while creating long-term liabilities. Event-only budgets, premiumization without community programming, and orphan governance structures predict decay.
Key Findings
Finding 1: The Verification Gap
Verified community soccer infrastructure funding totals $12.4 million across host cities—far below the billions in general World Cup spending. This verification gap reflects both the difficulty of isolating soccer-specific allocations within bundled infrastructure programs and the lack of standardized reporting across municipalities.
For diligence purposes, treat announced figures as ceilings rather than floors. The actual soccer development impact of "World Cup legacy" spending varies dramatically based on allocation specifics and operating commitments.
Finding 2: Access as Rate Limiter
Every major analysis of U.S. soccer growth identifies the same constraint: the gap between interest and participation reflects access barriers, not demand limitations. The World Cup will generate a viewership spike; converting that attention into sustained participation requires infrastructure that reaches underserved markets.
Current facility distribution skews toward affluent suburban corridors. World Cup legacy programs that reinforce this pattern—building premium venues in established soccer markets—generate less developmental return than investments in underserved urban and rural areas.
Finding 3: Governance Predicts Outcomes
The strongest predictor of infrastructure ROI isn't construction quality or location—it's governance. Facilities with clear long-term operators, dedicated maintenance funding, and utilization-based accountability consistently outperform better-funded projects lacking these structures.
Municipal sports investments fail most often not from inadequate capital but from governance gaps: unclear ownership, unfunded maintenance, and misaligned incentives between operators and communities.
Finding 4: League Structure Shapes Development Incentives
American professional soccer's closed-league model creates specific development dynamics. MLS franchise values have appreciated dramatically, but this appreciation reflects scarcity (limited expansion) rather than league-wide growth. The financial incentive to invest in grassroots development is attenuated when franchise value derives primarily from artificial supply constraints.
This doesn't make closed leagues inherently worse for development—but it does mean that community soccer infrastructure benefits from intentional design rather than natural league economics.
Finding 5: Decay Risk is Operational
Post-event facility decay is the most common failure mode for major sporting event infrastructure. Olympic venues worldwide demonstrate this pattern: construction budgets are funded while operating budgets are neglected, creating stranded assets.
The 2026 World Cup presents elevated decay risk because host cities are not building new stadiums—they're upgrading existing NFL venues. The ancillary infrastructure (training facilities, fan zones, community fields) lacks the built-in operating model that major stadium tenants provide.
Recommendations for Stakeholders
For Capital Allocators: Apply the 12 Signals framework to any World Cup-adjacent investment opportunity. Prioritize deals with clear operating partners, utilization metrics, and community benefit enforcement. Avoid event-only timing—the best opportunities emerge in years 2-5 post-tournament when legacy programs either prove or fail their models.
For Municipal Officials: Establish baseline utilization metrics before World Cup media attention inflates reported numbers. Structure community benefit agreements with enforcement mechanisms rather than aspirational language. Identify and fund the entity responsible for years 3-10 operations before breaking ground on new facilities.
For League Executives: Design development pathways that connect professional operations to community infrastructure. The leagues that solve American soccer's access problem will capture the largest share of the World Cup's viewership conversion opportunity.