I fully agree that three team groups would be abomination, both due to less guaranteed game, but mostly increased chances of collusion. However, I'd rather stay at 32 teams and see some teams not qualify (UKR, ITA, SWE this year) than the likes of Jamaica, Panama and Congo being there. But to each their own, of course. And, shocker, FIFA is all about the $$$.
TBF DR Congo are a pretty good team aha. Just horrifically organised and often dont have their full team.
A 48 team world cup would be great level wise IF they went something like:
UEFA: 20 spots
CAF: 11 spots (likely Morocco, Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Ghana, Senegal, Tunisia, Ivory Coast and 2-3 of Cameroon/Mali/Burkina Faso/South Africa/DR Congo)
CONMEBOL: 8 spots (likely Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Columbia, and 3 of Ecuador/Peru/Venezuela/Paraguay/Bolivia)
AFC: 6 spots (Japan, South Korea, Australia, Iran and 2 of China/Iraq/Oman/Saudi/Jordan/Qatar)
CONCACAF: 4 spots (USA, Mexico, Canada, Costa Rica)
OFC: 1 spot (New Zealand)
No-one would be outside the top ~60 in world rankings aside from New Zealand:
UEFA: 24 in top 50
CAF: 10 in top 50
CONMEBOL: 8 in top 50
AFC: 5 in top 50
CONCACAF: 3 in top 50
OFC: 0 in top 50
But as it is CONCACAF getting MAYBE 7 and AFC 8 is what will weaken it a lot. Only OFC which is New Zealand and no other legit national team is weaker.
There will be 16 spots for teams thats areas only comprise 8 of the top 50 on earth.
UEFA, CONMEBOL and CAF are the strongest three areas depth wise and may only get an extra 8 teams vs a 32 team world cup.