Why change AFCON now?

"If AFCON moves to a four-year cycle the biggest winners will likely be broadcasters and commercial partners who can sell a larger, more predictable product across cycles, while entities with global scheduling influence will negotiate to align the tournament with other FIFA events; that alignment concentrates commercial leverage with those partners and reduces bargaining power for local federations, clubs and national team coaches who currently rely on frequent tournaments for revenue and visibility."

"Domestic leagues face a squeeze in club calendars and player release windows as fewer but more commercially intense international tournaments will be prioritized, leaving clubs to manage player fatigue, shorter transfer windows and reduced matchday income when national teams schedule longer training camps; that pressure could force clubs to demand higher compensation, withdraw players from international duty or restructure seasons, with potential long-term consequences for player development pipelines and domestic competition quality."

"Power brokers within global football might use a quadrennial AFCON to centralize calendar control and monetization, leaving African stakeholders with limited leverage unless revenue sharing, transparent contracts and local development clauses are negotiated up front; without enforceable governance safeguards the shift risks deepening inequalities between elite federations and grassroots programs, undermining stadium investment, coaching education and youth academies that need consistent funding and exposure to sustain long-term continental growth."

CAF leadership proposed moving the Africa Cup of Nations from a two-year to a four-year cycle. Broadcasters and global commercial partners would gain scheduling clarity and enhanced rights value under a quadrennial model. Domestic leagues and clubs could face calendar congestion, player-release conflicts, and reduced matchday income due to fewer tournament windows. Players may see less frequent international exposure but lower travel burdens, while clubs may demand compensation or restructure seasons. Power dynamics would shift toward stakeholders with global influence, increasing the need for transparent revenue sharing and enforceable governance safeguards to protect grassroots development.

Read at www.aljazeera.com