African football found itself at the centre of intense debate a week ago after the Confederation of African Football (CAF) announced a major structural change to its flagship tournament, the Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON).
According to CAF President Patrice Motsepe, AFCON will now be staged on a four-year cycle, ending decades of the biennial format that has defined the competition’s identity.
The announcement has split opinions with supporters believing the decision could modernise the African football calendar, reduce player burnout, and elevate the tournament’s prestige. Critics, however, argue that CAF risks eroding AFCON’s uniqueness while aligning itself too closely with FIFA’s global football agenda.
So, is AFCON’s new four-year cycle a bold step forward or a strategic miscalculation? Sports Talk Florida takes a deep dive into the pros and cons of the new AFCON change.
Why CAF Is Rethinking AFCON’s Traditional Two-Year Cycle
|Since inception in 1957, AFCON’s two-year cycle has been both a strength and a unique feature of the tournament which offered African nations regular opportunities for continental glory and visibility.
However, it has recently placed enormous strain on players, clubs, and national team coaches especially those competing in Europe’s top leagues. African players already operate in one of the most congested football calendars in the world, from domestic leagues, continental club competitions, FIFA international windows, World Cup qualifiers, and to AFCON qualifiers which leave little room for recovery.
Additionally, hosting AFCON every two years, mostly in the middle of European seasons has long been a source of tension between African federations and European clubs. The most recent friction between the two parties being the release of players for the ongoing AFCON in Morocco, with FIFA announcing the mandatory release of players just five days before opening ceremony.
From CAF’s perspective, the move to a four-year cycle is a response to these realities. It promises better scheduling, longer preparation periods, and a reduction in calendar chaos that has historically disadvantaged African teams at global tournaments.
Where Does the African Nations League Fit In?
On paper, the idea makes sense as an African Nations League could replace low-quality friendlies with meaningful games, improve rankings, and create a steady revenue stream.
However, the introduction raises critical questions on how smaller football nations can handle financial and logistical demands.
Many African countries already lack FIFA-standard stadiums to host home games with South Africa and Morocco saving a number of countries during the World Cup qualifiers.
The African Nations League also leaves the African Nations Championship (CHAN), a tournament created to promote home-based players and domestic leagues across Africa with an uncertain future.
CHAN risks being overshadowed or rendered irrelevant, but if CAF is serious about football development, it must clearly define how CHAN fits into this new ecosystem.
Finally, AFCON’s frequent occurrence keeps African football constantly in the spotlight and this high-risk strategic gamble by CAF needs to be executed with clarity, transparency and genuine investment in African football structures.
