The Confederation of African Football (CAF) is reconsidering the future schedule of the Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON), with President Patrice Motsepe confirming that the continental football governing body is reviewing the possibility of returning the tournament to its traditional two-year cycle.
The development could mark a significant change in direction for African football, following CAF's earlier announcement that the continent's flagship men's national-team competition would move to a four-year cycle after the 2027 edition.
Motsepe disclosed the latest position during a three-day strategic conference in Cape Verde attended by football administrators and representatives from across Africa.
According to a report published by The Guardian Nigeria on October 10, 2026, the CAF president confirmed that the possibility of restoring the biennial format remained under review, although the organisation had not reached a final decision.
The discussion comes amid wider questions about the international football calendar, the commercial development of African competitions and the need to balance the interests of national teams, domestic leagues, clubs and players.
A return to a two-year schedule would preserve the competition's traditional frequency, allowing African national teams to compete for the continental title more regularly. However, such a change would also require CAF to reconsider its previously announced plans for the competition's future and determine how the tournament would fit into an increasingly crowded international calendar.
For now, the review represents a possible policy shift rather than a confirmed change to the competition's format.
CAF REOPENS THE DEBATE OVER AFCON'S FUTURE
AFCON has traditionally been held every two years, giving African national teams regular opportunities to compete for the continent's most prestigious men's international football trophy.
The competition has developed into a major sporting event, attracting audiences across Africa and among international football supporters. It also provides a platform for players to represent their countries, gain international exposure and compete for one of the continent's most recognised football honours.
CAF announced in December 2025 that AFCON would move to a four-year cycle after the 2027 tournament, which is scheduled to be hosted by Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda.
The decision represented a major departure from the competition's established pattern.
Under the proposed arrangement, the gap between editions would increase, potentially changing the way national teams organise their long-term preparation and how football supporters experience the tournament.
The revised calendar was also connected to CAF's plans for a new African Nations League, which was proposed to begin in 2029 and operate annually except during World Cup years.
The proposed competition was intended to create additional opportunities for national teams to participate in organised international football.
However, the move away from biennial AFCON raised questions about whether the new structure would adequately preserve the importance of the continental championship while creating room for other competitions.
Motsepe's latest comments suggest that CAF is willing to reconsider the arrangement.
The president did not announce a definitive return to the two-year format. Instead, he said the issue was being reviewed, leaving the final direction dependent on further consideration by the organisation.
WHAT MOTSEPE SAID ABOUT THE PROPOSAL
Motsepe's comments at the strategic conference indicated that CAF was examining whether the Africa Cup of Nations should return to a biennial schedule.
He said: "We are looking into bringing AFCON back to every two years. That's under review."
The statement leaves open several questions about the competition's future.
CAF must determine whether a return to the traditional schedule is the preferred option, how any revised calendar would affect the proposed African Nations League and whether the organisation would need to withdraw or adjust plans for future four-year editions.
The comments also indicate that the earlier decision should not necessarily be treated as the final word on the long-term structure of the tournament.
International football calendars are influenced by several factors, including national-team commitments, club competitions, player workload, commercial agreements and the availability of suitable tournament windows.
Changes to one major competition can have consequences for other events.
A more frequent AFCON would give national teams additional opportunities to compete for the title, but it would also require careful coordination with other international and domestic football commitments.
The review will therefore need to consider not only the sporting appeal of the tournament but also the practical arrangements required to stage it consistently.
Until CAF provides a formal decision, the four-year cycle and the proposed alternative should be understood as competing possibilities rather than a settled new schedule.
WHY AFCON'S FREQUENCY MATTERS
The frequency of AFCON has implications for national teams, players, supporters, football associations and host countries.
For national teams, a biennial tournament creates regular opportunities to assess progress, introduce emerging players and compete for a major international title.
It also gives coaches a recurring target around which they can organise preparation, qualification campaigns and squad development.
A four-year interval would create a longer gap between editions. While this could allow more time for preparation and commercial planning, it would also mean fewer opportunities for players and national teams to compete for the continental championship.
The impact could be particularly significant for teams experiencing a period of strong performance.
A national team that develops a talented generation of players might have fewer AFCON opportunities during that generation's peak years if the tournament takes place less frequently.
Conversely, a longer cycle could give some football associations additional time to develop infrastructure, improve coaching systems and prepare their teams for major competitions.
The balance between these considerations is central to the debate over AFCON's future.
Supporters of the traditional format may argue that regular tournaments help maintain the competition's prominence and preserve its place in African sporting culture.
Those who favour calendar reform may emphasise the need to coordinate international football more efficiently and create space for other competitions.
CAF's challenge is to determine a structure that serves African football as a whole rather than concentrating solely on one part of the international calendar.
IMPLICATIONS FOR AFRICAN NATIONAL TEAMS
A return to the two-year cycle would have direct implications for national-team planning.
Coaches could expect more frequent opportunities to compete for the AFCON title, although qualification arrangements and tournament dates would depend on the final structure approved by CAF.
More frequent editions could also influence squad selection and the development of younger players.
National teams often use major competitions to evaluate emerging talent and test how players perform under pressure against strong opponents.
A biennial schedule would provide additional opportunities for players to establish themselves internationally and for coaches to make adjustments between tournaments.
However, more frequent competitions could also place additional demands on football associations responsible for travel, preparation, technical staff and player management.
National federations operate with different financial resources and organisational capacities. Some may find it easier than others to maintain consistent preparation programmes.
A revised calendar would therefore need to consider the practical needs of associations across the continent.
The frequency of AFCON also affects how national teams balance the tournament with World Cup qualification and other international commitments.
CAF would need to coordinate dates carefully to avoid unnecessary conflicts and provide adequate preparation time.
For countries seeking to improve their international standing, a well-structured AFCON calendar can be an important component of long-term football development.
THE PROPOSED AFRICAN NATIONS LEAGUE
One of the major considerations in the AFCON debate is the proposed African Nations League.
CAF previously announced plans for the competition as part of a wider restructuring of African international football.
The proposed league was modelled partly on the UEFA Nations League, which provides European national teams with an organised competition outside the traditional major championship cycle.
Under CAF's earlier plan, the African Nations League was expected to begin in 2029 and take place annually except in World Cup years.
The idea was to provide national teams with additional structured competition and create a more organised international calendar.
Such a competition could potentially give teams more meaningful matches than a schedule dominated by friendlies.
It could also provide opportunities for teams to compete against opponents of comparable strength, depending on the format ultimately adopted.
However, the proposed Nations League and a biennial AFCON would need to coexist within a workable schedule.
If AFCON returns to every two years, CAF may need to reconsider the frequency, format or timing of the proposed league.
The organisation would also need to assess whether both competitions could be commercially sustainable and whether national associations could manage the additional commitments.
No final arrangement has been confirmed in the reports surrounding Motsepe's latest comments.
The relationship between the two competitions is therefore likely to remain a central issue as CAF considers its options.
COMMERCIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND REVENUE
AFCON is one of the most prominent properties in African sport, with commercial interests involving broadcasting, sponsorship, advertising and host-country investment.
The tournament's schedule can influence how CAF and its partners plan their activities.
A biennial format offers more frequent editions, potentially creating additional opportunities for sponsorship activation and broadcast engagement.
However, the financial value of any competition depends on more than frequency. Audience demand, organisation, production quality, commercial agreements and the competitiveness of participating teams all play important roles.
A four-year cycle could allow organisers more time between editions to develop commercial strategies and coordinate with other sporting events.
It could also make each edition less frequent, changing the rhythm of audience engagement and the opportunities available to sponsors.
The financial consequences of a return to the two-year format would therefore need to be assessed carefully.
Host countries also have commercial and economic interests in the competition.
Staging AFCON can require investment in stadiums, training facilities, transport, accommodation, security and event operations.
More frequent editions could create additional hosting opportunities, but they could also place greater demands on countries seeking to meet the necessary standards.
CAF would need to balance the benefits of regular competition against the costs and practical requirements of staging the event.
Any future decision should take into account the interests of sponsors, broadcasters, national associations, host governments and football supporters.
THE INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL CALENDAR
AFCON's future cannot be considered in isolation from the wider international football calendar.
National teams compete in World Cup qualification, continental qualification tournaments and international windows established for national-team football.
Players also have commitments to their clubs, many of which compete in domestic leagues and continental club tournaments.
Changes to the timing of AFCON can therefore affect several stakeholders beyond the national teams participating in the competition.
A return to the two-year format would require CAF to coordinate with other football authorities and consider the availability of suitable windows.
The organisation would need to avoid placing unreasonable demands on players who already face intensive schedules across domestic and international competitions.
Clubs may also have concerns about player availability during major national-team tournaments, particularly when competitions overlap with important stages of domestic seasons.
At the same time, national teams require access to their best players for meaningful international competitions.
The challenge is to create a calendar that recognises the importance of both club and international football.
A sustainable arrangement would need to provide clarity well in advance so that players, clubs, national associations and tournament organisers could plan effectively.
CAF's review provides an opportunity to examine these competing demands before committing to a long-term structure.
WHAT THE REVIEW MEANS FOR HOST COUNTRIES
The future AFCON calendar also matters to countries seeking to host the competition.
The 2027 edition is scheduled to take place in Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda, representing a joint hosting arrangement in East Africa.
Preparations for a tournament of this scale involve stadium readiness, accommodation, transport, training facilities, security and coordination between multiple public and private organisations.
A change in the frequency of future editions could influence the opportunities available to other countries interested in hosting AFCON.
A biennial cycle would potentially create more regular hosting opportunities, although CAF would still need to assess bids and ensure that host countries meet its requirements.
A four-year cycle would provide longer intervals between editions, potentially changing the amount of time available for countries to prepare bids and complete infrastructure projects.
For governments, hosting decisions involve balancing the costs of preparation against the possible benefits of tourism, international visibility and economic activity.
The actual benefits vary according to the quality of planning, the use of existing facilities and the financial arrangements supporting the event.
CAF would therefore need to consider hosting capacity and infrastructure standards alongside its decisions about tournament frequency.
The proposed return to a two-year cycle does not itself change the confirmed hosting arrangements for the 2027 tournament.
Any changes affecting subsequent editions would require formal decisions and clear communication from the governing body.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
The immediate next step is for CAF to continue reviewing the future structure of AFCON and determine whether the biennial format should be restored.
Motsepe's statement confirms that the possibility is under consideration, but it does not establish that the governing body has approved a new schedule.
CAF will need to assess the implications for the international calendar, the proposed African Nations League, commercial partnerships and national associations.
The organisation may also need to clarify what would happen to its earlier plans for four-year AFCON cycles and how any transition would be managed.
Until an official decision is announced, national federations, players and supporters should avoid treating the proposed return as confirmed.
The debate nevertheless signals that CAF remains willing to reconsider a major structural decision about African international football.
For supporters, the possibility of returning to a two-year cycle raises the prospect of seeing the continent's leading national teams compete for the title more frequently.
For administrators, it presents a complex planning challenge involving sporting priorities, commercial sustainability and the practical realities of the international calendar.
The outcome will help determine how African national-team football is organised in the years following the 2027 tournament.
CONCLUSION
CAF's review of a possible return to the traditional two-year Africa Cup of Nations schedule has reopened an important debate about the future of African football.
The governing body had previously announced plans to move to a four-year cycle after the 2027 edition, alongside proposals for an African Nations League beginning in 2029.
Motsepe's latest comments indicate that the biennial option is again being examined, although no final decision has been announced.
The choice will have implications for national teams, players, football associations, sponsors, broadcasters and countries seeking to host the competition.
A more frequent AFCON could preserve the tournament's traditional rhythm and provide additional opportunities for national teams to compete for the continental title. However, any revised schedule would need to be coordinated carefully with other international commitments and the proposed Nations League.
The central question is how CAF can develop a sustainable calendar that protects the importance of AFCON while supporting the wider growth of football across the continent.
For now, the review marks a significant development in the debate over the competition's future. The final decision will depend on CAF's assessment and any formal announcement that follows.