ไทย
English
中國人
Among all the impressive, cutting-edge venues across the United States, FIFA selected the widely-criticized MetLife Stadium as the host for the 2026 World Cup final.
Any New York Giants or New York Jets supporter knows how uninspiring MetLife Stadium is compared to virtually every other NFL venue in the country. It even falls short of the finest college football arenas, and you could probably find a high school stadium in Texas that outclasses the facility many mockingly call a "giant air conditioner."
Yet the grandest match—and spectacle—in soccer is set to unfold at MetLife Stadium on Sunday. Spain and Argentina will clash for the sport's most coveted trophy, as fans and celebrities from all corners of life pack into the venue alongside U.S. President Donald Trump.
The on-field drama and the extraordinary halftime show will undoubtedly draw attention away from the venue, but they won't change the undeniable reality: MetLife Stadium was the wrong choice to host the 2026 World Cup final.
MetLife Stadium's Shortcomings Laid Bare
Let's address the obvious: MetLife Stadium is something of an eyesore. Since it serves as home to two NFL franchises, the design is a bland grey, devoid of any identity or personality from the outside.
There are no modern flourishes, no creative architecture, no retractable roof. It is simply a grey mass planted in the middle of nowhere.
Compared to the likes of SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, Calif., AT&T Stadium in Dallas, and Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta, the venue is almost comical.
"There's no comparison," says New Jersey resident Chris, a lifelong New York Giants supporter. "I've visited the best stadiums in this country, and MetLife doesn't even make the top 15. It's absurd that the final is being held there when SoFi [Stadium] exists."
Beyond aesthetics, MetLife Stadium is also a logistical nightmare to reach. The venue may sit just five miles west of Manhattan, but on match day, that journey stretches into at least an hour-long drive—and that's only if you arrive hours before kickoff.
Parking presents an even greater challenge, as general parking is unavailable at the stadium itself. Fans are instead required to pay $225 for premium parking at American Dream, a shopping mall within the Meadowlands Sports Complex where the stadium is located.
Those opting for public transit from New York City to East Rutherford, N.J. must shell out $98 for a ticket from Penn Station—a steep World Cup surcharge from the standard $12.90 fare. Rideshares are available too, but finding one during the post-match rush is another story entirely.
Walking is simply not an option, as the stadium is encircled by highways choked with traffic that makes getting home a monumental task. Add President Trump's arrival into the mix, and Sunday's final could very well bring New York-New Jersey transportation to a standstill.
Quality Concerns Reign Supreme
Beyond the stadium's dull appearance and difficult-to-reach location, it is also notorious for its subpar conditions. In the NFL, MetLife Stadium is consistently ranked among the worst venues to play in, largely due to its artificial turf, which has been associated with a troubling number of ACL injuries over the years.
The stadium swapped out the turf for natural grass ahead of the World Cup, but the transition has been far from smooth. Players have voiced complaints about the pitch quality throughout the summer.
"The pitch ... I don't even know if you can call it that," France midfielder Adrien Rabiot said following his side's 3–1 win over Senegal at MetLife Stadium. "It felt more like an artificial surface ... quite hard and quite rigid."
Brazil winger Vinícius Júnior echoed those concerns. "In the second half, with the heat, the pitch dries out very quickly. The game becomes very sluggish, and we can't find our rhythm," he said after Brazil's 1–1 draw with Morocco.
The stadium activates its sprinkler system during hydration breaks in an attempt to keep the pitch from drying out, but without a roof to block the sun, it offers little relief in the summer heat. The pitches at SoFi Stadium, AT&T Stadium, and Mercedes-Benz Stadium, among others, hold up better since their roofs can shield the surface—and both players and fans—from the elements.
There was even speculation about the final potentially relocating at the last minute due to poor air quality in the New York-New Jersey region caused by Canadian wildfires. Heavy rain and thunderstorms on Saturday helped improve conditions, but the flash flooding across the area could have caused significant damage to the pitch, making the stage for soccer's biggest match even less appealing.
Why FIFA Chose MetLife to Host the 2026 World Cup Final
With so much working against MetLife Stadium, it's difficult to understand why FIFA selected it to host the 2026 World Cup final. The answer, however, is fairly straightforward: its proximity to New York City.
New York City is the epicenter. It's the destination that draws visitors from across the globe eager to experience the largest city in the U.S.—not to mention its status as both the media capital and economic capital of the world.
MetLife Stadium may be underwhelming, but New York City never is, particularly for those visiting for the first time from abroad, like many of the fans making the trip for this summer's World Cup.
Enable functional cookies to see this feature.
Unlike Hard Rock Stadium in Miami, which stumbled during its audition as host of the 2024 Copa América final, MetLife Stadium boasts a strong track record of successfully staging major events. It served as the venue for the 2025 Club World Cup final, hosted WrestleMania 35, and regularly welcomes the world's biggest musical acts.
It's understandable why FIFA had it circled on the map for the World Cup final, yet it undeniably leaves much to be desired given the superior stadiums that exist elsewhere across the country.