OPINION: FFE is Africa’s only chance to catch up with European football
When FIFA unveiled its proposal to establish a commercial subsidiary — FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) — reactions were predictably split. All 55 of the Union of European Football Associations’ (UEFA) members condemned the plan, warning that selling a stake in FIFA’s event rights to external investors, even without ceding control, risks undermining the principles of the game.
Their concerns are valid. But for most members of the Confederation of African Football (CAF), the proposal represents something far more urgent: survival and growth, and a rare chance to level up. CAF has not yet reacted to the proposal.
A 4‑year cycle (2027–2030) grant of USD 20 million, up from the current 8 million, plus an optional USD 20 million for special projects, could be transformative. For African football nations, this is not about luxury — it is about catching up.
Close to half of CAF’s 54 members lacked approved stadiums to host World Cup qualifiers in March 2025. Zimbabwe’s national team has not played at home since November 2021. Development systems are broken, grassroots academies are underfunded, and federations clash with players and coaches over unpaid obligations.
In economies where sponsorship is rare and informal structures dominate, this injection of capital is the only realistic path to building infrastructure, reviving youth football, and professionalising administration.
Europe does not need FIFA’s money. It already generates billions through domestic leagues, Champions League rights, and sponsorships. In fact, UEFA has extended a helping hand to Africa through the UEFA/CAF Assist programme. But that assistance is not enough to bridge the structural gap.
Africa needs a jumpstart, and FFE offers precisely that. To reject it wholesale would be to deny African football its only chance to operate at a competitive level with nations in formal economies where football accrues true commercial value.
This is not a call to dismiss UEFA’s principles. Safeguards must be built into the FFE structure to ensure member associations retain control over major decisions, especially on the World Cup.
What FIFA members should interrogate are control mechanisms, not the funding itself. An inter‑confederation caucus could help balance commercial realities with governance principles, ensuring that external capital strengthens football without eroding its founding values.
Football has already proven its commercial muscle. Players now cost hundreds of millions; broadcasting rights run into billions. Why should African nations be denied the opportunity to harness that same commercial power for collective growth?
Throwing away the proposal entirely would be detrimental to the game’s development. Reshaping the idea into a structure that protects sovereignty while unlocking resources is the smarter path.
For Zimbabwe and many other CAF members, this is a rare chance to finally build stadiums, fund grassroots academies, and stabilise administration. If managed responsibly, the FFE grants could lift African football to the level of other great continents.
Perhaps UEFA nations, as part of the UEFA Assist initiative, can offer technical assistance, helping Africa produce quality products that generate revenue and reduce dependency on grants. That is how football can grow equitably — not through egos, but through shared vision.
Africa cannot afford to let this funding opportunity slip. The game’s popularity and appeal demand growth, and FFE might just be the lever to make it happen.
