As Nigeria approaches another NFF election, a familiar debate returns: have we truly reformed the system that chooses the people who run our football? By Paul Lucky Okoku Segun “Mathematical” Odegbami shared with me details of an important discussion he brought on 90 mins with Mathematical on Eagle7 Sports Radio 103.7 FM, Abeokuta. His subject is not a small one. Should the forthcoming Nigeria Football Federation election be stopped until fundamental questions about the electoral system are addressed? Odegbami has titled his intervention: “Appeal to President BAT — Stop the NFF Elections.” His contention is that despite amendments to the NFF electoral framework, the process remains structurally tilted toward the established football political system and continues to make it extraordinarily difficult for genuine outsiders to compete on equal terms. He also intends to discuss his decision to take the matter to the Nigerian civil courts in an attempt, as he puts it, to reset the administration of Nigerian football. Whether you ultimately agree with his position or disagree with it, I believe Nigerians who care about the direction of our football should listen. Because this conversation is bigger than one election. It is about the system through which we choose the people entrusted with running Nigerian football. WHY THIS CONVERSATION MATTERS There is historical context that makes Odegbami’s intervention worthy of serious attention. For years, one of the biggest criticisms of NFF elections has concerned the extraordinary electoral influence of the State Football Associations. Under the previous electoral structure, representatives of the 36 State Football Associations and the FCT accounted for 37 of the 44 votes in the NFF Congress. That was approximately 84 percent of the entire electorate. Think about that for a moment. One constituency effectively possessed enough votes by itself to determine who became President of the Nigeria Football Federation. And this concern is not new. As far back as 2010, contemporary Nigerian reporting was already questioning the concentration of electoral power among the State FA chairmen and whether such a small electorate made the system vulnerable to influence and patronage. That year also produced another controversial episode. Before the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, Vanguard reported that at least 30 State FA chairmen had been approved to travel to the tournament. The report raised questions at the time about the relationship between those World Cup trips and the approaching NFF electoral contest. Nigeria’s World Cup campaign ended in June. The NFF election followed in August. The election subsequently became the subject of litigation. Sixteen years later, Nigerian football is still debating some of the same fundamental questions about who chooses its leadership and how much influence different constituencies should possess. That history alone should make us pay attention. SOMETHING HAS CHANGED It is equally important to acknowledge that the NFF has now amended its statutes and electoral framework. At the Extraordinary General Assembly held in Yenagoa on March 23, 2026, the Congress approved amended NFF Statutes, a new Electoral Code and new Standing Orders. Representatives of FIFA and CAF were present. So it would be unfair to suggest that nothing has changed. Something has. Under the previous structure, the NFF Congress consisted of 44 voting members, with the 36 State Football Associations and the FCT accounting for 37 of those 44 votes—approximately 84 percent of the entire electorate. The amended structure expands participation. The new Congress provides for 54 votes, with representation broadened to include additional constituencies within Nigerian football, including leagues, clubs, women’s football, players, coaches and referees. The 36 State Football Associations and the FCT, however, still retain 37 of the 54 votes. That means their share of the electorate has fallen from approximately 84 percent to about 68.5 percent. That is a significant numerical change, and it should be acknowledged. The reform has reduced the overwhelming dominance the State FAs previously enjoyed and has created additional space for other football stakeholders. That is progress. But the mathematics also raises another legitimate question. Thirty-seven votes out of 54 still represent more than two-thirds of the entire voting strength. So while the numbers have changed, has the balance of power changed enough? Do pla
Don't miss out on breaking stories and in-depth articles.
