Four reasons why we think 'it's coming home' for E...

For six months now, I've had an inkling that I haven't been able to shake: I think It's Coming Home this time. England is going to win the World Cup for the first time in 60 years. Every time ESPN's soccer team was asked to power rank teams heading toward the World Cup, I voted England No. 1. When we were asked to make various predictions before the tournament, I was the only one to pick England to win despite the fact that they were -- and remain -- the No. 3 betting favorite. I'm sure part of this was a stubborn (and perhaps antisocial) streak on my part, but I just didn't see any weaknesses. The player pool is deep enough that key players from Premier League champion Arsenal (Ben White, Myles Lewis-Skelly) and Real Madrid (Trent Alexander-Arnold), plus the 2023-24 Premier League player of the year (Phil Foden) and 2023-24 England player of the year (Cole Palmer) didn't even make the squad. The pool is also versatile enough that a manager could craft a team around two or three different styles of play: You could lean into functional, physically impressive talent and overwhelm foes. You could put together a particularly hard-charging and old-school English squad, or you could even craft one of the most creative and almost finesse-oriented teams. Manager Thomas Tuchel went with the first approach, more or less. and he was also one of the reasons I found England so tantalizing. He's a Champions League-winning coach and one of the best single-match tacticians in the world, while his biggest liability at the club level -- he always seems to wear out his welcome with complaints about everything he doesn't have -- wouldn't apply at the international level: He has what he has, and he has to live with it. - World Cup match schedule: All fixtures, results, features - Overreactions to the R32 bracket: USA has an easy run? - Marcotti: Best XI of the World Cup group stage Admittedly, the group stage has given me pause. Tuchel definitely chose functionality over creativity for his 26-man roster, and for large portions of matches against Ghana and Panama, the team looked, well, uncreative. Plus, with Tino Livramento (calf) out and both Reece James (hamstring) and Jarell Quansah (ankle) hobbling, England are suddenly dealing with an injury crisis at right back, too. With up to five matches remaining, backup left-back Djed Spence might have to carry serious weight on the opposite flank. And yet, most of the favorites are also dealing with issues. Spain are battling their own injuries (namely to Lamine Yamal) and have fought long bouts of ineffective attacking. France, as always under Didier Deschamps, give up control of the ball and/or match for long periods of time and are completely reliant on random bursts of individual brilliance from their most bankable stars. And for as great as Argentina have looked thus far, they've had a pretty easy draw, and their offense is almost completely reliant on a 39-year old G.O.A.T. continuing to do all the scoring. England remains the (tied for) No. 3 betting favorite, and I almost think that if they weren't England -- the team that always falls short, the team for which It never Comes Home -- their odds might be even better. But I'm married to my pick, so allow me to walk myself (and you) through the reasons why they should still be considered a favorite. Or maybe even the favorite. Reason 1: The Premier League effect There is a benefit to having a player pool based in, well, England, the home of the Premier League, with its stylistically diverse (and well-paid) rosters and the best (and most well-paid) set of managers in the world. England once isolated itself from the rest of the soccer world because it felt it had nothing to learn. It had invented the sport, after all, and how could anyone play it any better? According to Willy Meisl's Soccer Revolution, when England's first World Cup excursion ended in embarrassment in Brazil in 1950, most English journalists didn't even stick around for the rest of the tournament because "there could hardly be much of a 'story' in it." Even after a string of high-profile losses and only one real international success -- the 1966 World Cup, won at home -- England never really felt compelled to evolve its game the way that other countries had. In the mid-2020s, however, England is the world's foremost soccer melting pot. Because of the Premier League, not only do England's top-tier prospects go up against the world's best with regularity; so do their second- or third-tier prospects. They have been exposed not only to the possession-dominant tactics of Pep Guardiola in soccer's Guardiola era; they have also been exposed to -- and perhaps participated in -- every possible counter to the Guardiola game. Twenty-five of 26 players on England's World Cup roster played for a club in Opta's current world top 30 last season. Not even Spain or France can approach that. England's roster is in the discussion for having the most talent, but that talent is unquestionably the most tested at the club level. That makes this team as likely as any to grow and improve as the knockout rounds progress. There's another Premier League effect, too, of course: set pieces. They have been a strength of the national team for a while, and in 2025-26, no league embraced set piece life more than the EPL, for better (success) or worse (aesthetics). And sure enough, in the World Cup group stage, England ranked first in shots from set pieces (18), third in xG created from them (2.5) and fourth in set-piece goals (two). Reason 2: They dominate when matches open up In a way, the World Cup is two different tournaments for heavyweights. In the early stages, it is a test of who can most properly break down underdogs playing bunkered-in, low-block defenses. But as the knockout stages progress and the quality of the opponent rises, the game tends to open up a bit with both teams looking to control possession and make things happen. England certainly didn't pass its first major low-block test. Against sufferball enthusiast Carlos Queiroz and Ghana, England struggled to break down what almost amounted to a six-man back line. They had 270 touches in the attacking third, but only 33 in the box; they attempted 19 shots, but only five were within eight meters of the goal, and only one -- Harry Kane's surprising rebound miss in the 86th minute -- was worth more than 0.2 xG. England forced only three saves from Ghana's Benjamin Asare, and while they still completely dominated the match as a whole -- Ghana managed just two shot attempts and 10 touches in the box -- they ended up lucky not to allow a late penalty and potentially lose. But in the opener, Croatia chose to trade blows and play a more open game, and England scored a knockout combination early in the second half, winning 4-2. While Panama chose to defend deep pretty often, as heavy underdogs usually do, they also attempted to score, attempting 13 shots and playing extremely direct ball. Eventually England found the spaces they needed and won 2-0. Granted, there are plenty of low-block teams left in this tournament. In fact, England's round-of-32 opponent, Congo DR, allowed shots worth a total of just 1.8 xG in their first three matches: a paltry 0.6 per match. In Newcastle's Yoane Wissa, they have a suddenly in-form goal scorer as well. They will test what Tuchel and England learned from the Ghana match, and if that answer is "not enough," they could threaten an upset. England are still favored, however, and assuming they advance, the style of play will slowly open up. Either of their two potential round-of-16 opponents, Mexico (third in xG allowed) or Ecuador (a back line full of Big Five talent), can defend with vigor, but they also try much harder to possess the ball. And from an odds perspective, their most likely quarterfinal opponent would be either Brazil (counter-attacking potential, but with plenty of possession play) or Erling Haaland's Norway (all attack, little defense). While the caliber of the opponent tends to improve as the knockout rounds unfold, the style of play will become more favorable to England as well. Reason 3: They have Bellingham Jude Bellingham is a world-class defensive midfielder in a forward's body. At Borussia Dortmund, he was so brilliant in a box-to-box role that management had to implore him to move forward. Then, in his first year at Real Madrid, he found things so enjoyable moving forward -- he scored 23 goals in all competitions after scoring 24 in three years in Dortmund -- that it seemed to make people forget how good he is as a DM. (Or it just exposed who doesn't follow the Bundesliga closely enough. You should! It's a super fun league!) In three World Cup matches thus far, Bellingham has been both BVB Jude and Madrid Jude. Among the 198 midfielders who logged at least 100 minutes in the group stage -- good lord, this is a big tournament -- he ranked second in combined goals and assists (three), fourth in shots on goal (four) and ninth in ball recoveries in the attacking third (three), a reminder of how vital he can be in attacking, pressing and full-pitch defending. But he's also ninth in ball recoveries in the defensive third (nine), 10th in ground duels won (18) and 13th in successful tackles (nine). He's making plays on both ends. And his contributions were vital against Panama in the third match. When the chemistry speaks for itself 🏴 pic.twitter.com/ofpECJ25jc — FOX Soccer (@FOXSoccer) June 27, 2026 Bellingham scored England's first goal, assisted its second (to Harry Kane) and led the team in chances created (four), fouls won (four), successful tackles (four), ball recoveries (seven) and ground duels won (15!). He dominated the match physically and creatively. And when England find themselves in a rut, he can almost single-handedly pull them out. Reason 4: They've been good! and check out the new PADDLIN' World Cup Performance Index pages — Michael Caley (@MC_of_A) June 28, 2026 you are unlikely to guess who it thinks has played the best this world cup (except that it's already in the image) pic.twitter.com/1e6XgFigxk It's been 24 years since the eventual World Cup champion made it through the group stage without dropping points. We know this, but it doesn't stop us from ramping up the negative vibes anytime a favorite looks imperfect (especially when attempting to break down the aforementioned low blocks). Spain couldn't hit the broad side of a barn against Cape Verde and looked uncertain against Uruguay. Brazil looked second-best against Morocco and listless for a half against Japan. The three teams that won all of their group stage matches -- Mexico, France and Argentina -- combined to beat just one team in the top 20 of the FIFA rankings (France over Senegal). None of them beat anyone as good as Croatia (13th), England's first group stage opponent. Even with the relative struggles against Ghana and, to a lesser degree, Panama, England grades out well on offense and beautifully on defense thus far. They're second in shots per possession, fourth in shots on goal, sixth in high-quality shots (0.2 xG or higher) and eighth in xG created. Their six goals scored rank a solid 13th, too, but all those other rankings suggest they've been unlucky to score only six. Meanwhile, they have yet to allow a single high-quality shot, and they're both second in shots allowed per possession and third in xG allowed per shot. They're first in fouls drawn (52), first in percentage of duels won (55.1%), second in through-balls completed (eight), second in progressive passes allowed (69), third in possession rate (64.8%), fifth in passes allowed per defensive action (8.6), sixth in progressive carries (276), seventh in passes per possession (7.9) and progressive carries allowed (119). Their statistical profile is as good as almost anyone's thus far, and again, they're as likely as anyone to grow into the tournament. If you want further proof of that, here's where I also mention that in the last five major tournaments (World Cups and Euros) going back to 2018, only France (17) has won more matches than England (16). Picking anyone to win a five-round knockout competition is a fool's errand: even the projected favorite isn't going to have a better than 1-in-4 or 1-in-5 chance. But while France and Argentina look great, and none of the other favorites have disqualified themselves with iffy play (except maybe Portugal), picking England makes as much as anything. When you have a chance to be bold and predict something that hasn't happened in 60 years, you do so. It's Coming Home.