Former Nigerian players can run NFF, but leadership must come with accountability (Part 2)

𝐁𝐲 𝐏𝐚𝐮𝐥 𝐋𝐮𝐜𝐤𝐲 𝐎𝐤𝐨𝐤𝐮

In Part One of this broader series, I worked directly from the 𝐍𝐅𝐅’𝐬 existing management model — the structure through which the federation currently operates, inherited from the outgoing administration of 𝐈𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐆𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐮 and 𝐌𝐨𝐡𝐚𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐬𝐢 — to show how budgeting, delegation, professional support and management tools such as 𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐈 and 𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐃 can function within that system.

Part Two continues from that same real-world model. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐅𝐅 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐨𝐫𝐲.

A newly elected president would not walk into an empty office. The NFF does not disappear when a president leaves. Department leaders and professional staff remain in place across Finance, Competitions, Technical matters, Legal Services, Media, Protocol and other areas, continuing the federation’s day-to-day work.

Finance still functions. Competitions still functions. Technical, Legal, Media, Protocol and the other departments continue doing their jobs.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐫𝐮𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐲𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞.

The president works through those professionals, receives briefings, asks questions, sets direction, delegates responsibility, monitors performance and holds people accountable.

Like any executive entering an established organization, he must learn the institution. That does not mean learning how to lead. It means learning the organization he has been entrusted to lead.

I understand why, from a distance, some people may think former Nigerian players cannot successfully run the NFF as president. Management can sound complicated when expressed in technical language.

But the principle is straightforward:

𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞. 𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫. 𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐮𝐞. 𝐆𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐞𝐝. 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐥𝐢𝐩.

Management is not easy. It requires education, discipline, judgment, emotional control and the ability to manage pressure.

But when the right people are already in place, leadership becomes clearer: lead by example, respect professional boundaries, treat employees properly and hold everyone — including leadership — accountable.

𝐀𝐂𝐂𝐎𝐔𝐍𝐓𝐀𝐁𝐈𝐋𝐈𝐓𝐘 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐁𝐄𝐆𝐈𝐍 𝐁𝐄𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐀𝐔𝐃𝐈𝐓𝐎𝐑𝐒 𝐀𝐑𝐑𝐈𝐕𝐄

Every department must know what it owns and account for what it has been assigned.

Money entering the NFF — from 𝐅𝐈𝐅𝐀, 𝐂𝐀𝐅, the Federal Government, sponsors and other legitimate sources — should have a documented source and purpose.

Money leaving should have an approved budget line, authorization and supporting records.

History explains why. In 𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟗, 𝐔𝐒$𝟐𝟑𝟔,𝟎𝟎𝟎 earmarked for Super Eagles World Cup qualifying activities was reported missing from the federation’s secretariat safe.

In 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟎, 𝐒𝐚𝐧𝐢 𝐋𝐮𝐥𝐮 𝐀𝐛𝐝𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐡𝐢, 𝐀𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐳𝐞 𝐔𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐠𝐛𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐦, 𝐓𝐚𝐢𝐰𝐨 𝐎𝐠𝐮𝐧𝐣𝐨𝐛𝐢 and 𝐃𝐫. 𝐁𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐣𝐢 𝐎𝐣𝐨-𝐎𝐛𝐚 were arraigned over allegations involving more than 𝐍𝟏.𝟓 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 in NFF expenditure connected with the 2010 World Cup, alongside specific dollar-denominated allegations including 𝐔𝐒$𝟏𝟐𝟓,𝟎𝟎𝟎 for hotel bookings, 𝐔𝐒$𝟐𝟓𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎 relating to airline arrangements and 𝐔𝐒$𝟒𝟎𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎 connected with the Nigeria–Colombia friendly. They were later discharged and acquitted.

In 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟔, during the 𝐀𝐦𝐚𝐣𝐮 𝐏𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐤 administration, 𝐅𝐈𝐅𝐀 questioned documentation relating to 𝐔𝐒$𝟖𝟎𝟐,𝟎𝟎𝟎 in development funds. Then Sports Minister 𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐃𝐚𝐥𝐮𝐧𝐠 said further development funding had been withheld because proper documentation had not been provided. The NFF disputed suggestions of mismanagement and maintained that its accounts had been audited.

More recently, under the 𝐈𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐆𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐮-led administration, the 𝐄𝐅𝐂𝐂 and 𝐈𝐂𝐏𝐂 began investigating utilisation of the 𝐍𝟏𝟐 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 Federal Government intervention fund for national-team obligations.The investigation remained ongoing in 𝐀𝐮𝐠𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔.

The lesson is prevention, not accusation.

Regular reconciliation, compliance reviews, documented approvals and independent external audits should be routine. In 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔, the NFF Congress approved 𝐄𝐫𝐧𝐬𝐭 & 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐠 as independent auditor for four years.

𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐨𝐰.

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐁𝐔𝐃𝐆𝐄𝐓 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐄 𝐁𝐄𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐄 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐏𝐄𝐓𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍

Nigeria should not arrive in camp and then begin arguing about bonuses, tickets, coaches’ salaries or accommodation.

The NFF acknowledged owing 𝐒𝐡𝐮𝐚𝐢𝐛𝐮 𝐀𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐮 salary when he died in 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟔. 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐊𝐞𝐬𝐡𝐢 was also reported to be owed outstanding national-team bonuses.

𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐂𝐡𝐮𝐤𝐰𝐮 later said he was owed salary from his Super Eagles tenure, a claim the NFF disputed. 𝐅𝐚𝐭𝐚𝐢 𝐀𝐦𝐨𝐨 raised unpaid national-team salary issues, while 𝐂𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐒𝐢𝐣𝐢 𝐋𝐚𝐠𝐮𝐧𝐣𝐮 documented a claim for 𝐔𝐒$𝟗,𝟑𝟓𝟎 in outstanding estacode allowances from national-team assignments.

Before competition begins, the budget should cover salaries, bonuses, travel, accommodation, medical support, equipment, administrative requirements and an approved contingency reserve.

If the team progresses in the tournament, additional costs should already be planned. If it exits earlier, unused unrestricted funds should remain with the institution, while restricted funds must be handled according to the conditions attached to them.

And the accounting should not end when the competition ends.

If money was budgeted through the final and the team exits in the quarterfinals, leadership should be able to show what was actually spent, what remains, whether any balance is restricted and where the remaining money sits.

That should not require a crisis, an investigation or a public argument.

𝐈𝐟 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐭.

FIFA’s rules against undue interference should not be turned into a shield against legitimate financial scrutiny. When the Federal Government provides grants, appropriations or intervention funds, asking how that money was spent is not the same as taking over the federation.

Nigeria should not be frightened away from legitimate accountability by the repeated warning that “FIFA will ban us.”

FIFA protects the independence of football governance, but 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲.

The NFF itself says FIFA and CAF funds are tied to specific purposes and are subject to compliance, monitoring and audit.

So the principle should be simple:

𝐈𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜, 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐭.
𝐈𝐟 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐅𝐈𝐅𝐀 𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐀𝐅 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲, 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐭 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐞𝐬.
𝐈𝐟 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞, 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐭 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭.

A responsible administration should not run from an audit. It should be ready for one.

𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.
𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.
𝐀𝐬𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲 𝐰𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.

And Nigerians should not treat every circulating claim of a FIFA sanction as gospel. In 𝐒𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔, the NFF itself had to debunk a purported FIFA letter threatening Nigeria with suspension as fake.

𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐢𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲.

If qualified former internationals ask for the opportunity to lead, we must also be prepared to accept the scrutiny that comes with that responsibility.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐍𝐢𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐛𝐚𝐥𝐥, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐜𝐜𝐮𝐩𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞.

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐈𝐌𝐒 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐍𝐄𝐂𝐓𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐊

An 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐌𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐥𝐞 connects departments, deadlines and dependencies so leadership can see what must happen first, who is responsible and what other work is affected when something slips.

Finance may need an approved budget before travel is booked. Legal may need to clear a contract before payment is released. Technical decisions may affect invitations, visas and travel.

𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐧 means on schedule.

𝐀𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 means at risk and requires a recovery plan.

𝐑𝐞𝐝 means immediate escalation.

The purpose is simple: identify delays early, communicate them to affected departments and escalate before they become crises.

Major competition, financial, legal or public-accountability issues should never reach the president as a surprise.

𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐝𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐫𝐮𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬. 𝐏𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐝𝐨.

Part II

Systems provide structure.
𝐏𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤.

Having examined accountability, budgeting, audit readiness and departmental coordination in Part 1, this concluding installment turns to the people inside the system — how leadership manages conflict, sets employees up for success, recognizes performance, uses experience wisely and builds an institution that can outlive any one administration.

𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐅𝐋𝐈𝐂𝐓 𝐌𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐁𝐄 𝐌𝐀𝐍𝐀𝐆𝐄𝐃

Professionals will disagree. Finance may reject an undocumented request. Technical may see an urgent football need. Legal may identify contractual risk.

𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐛𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐩𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐝.

People should be able to raise legitimate concerns respectfully when they believe a decision conflicts with policy, ethics or the federation’s objectives.

Resolve conflict at the lowest appropriate level: establish the facts, listen, agree on the next action and document important decisions.

If necessary, escalate. T𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐩𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭.

𝐒𝐄𝐓 𝐏𝐄𝐎𝐏𝐋𝐄 𝐔𝐏 𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐒𝐔𝐂𝐂𝐄𝐒𝐒

Accountability should not begin by waiting for someone to fail.

𝐒𝐞𝐭 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬. Give them clear expectations, adequate resources, appropriate authority and regular feedback.

A department head should know what is expected, what success looks like and when the work is due.

If someone underperforms, the first objective should be improvement, not termination.

Counsel the employee. Document the problem. Set expectations. Follow up. Where necessary, use a 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧 (𝐏𝐈𝐏) with measurable goals.

If performance still does not improve after a fair opportunity, management must act.

But accountability cannot be the only language employees hear.

𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭. And when people deliver, let them know their work is seen.

Praise reinforces strong performance and positive behavior. Recognition may come through verbal praise, formal acknowledgment, awards, professional opportunities, a gift or monetary recognition where policy permits.

Recognition does more than reward one individual. It tells the organization what good performance looks like and encourages others to reach that standard.

𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜. 𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐞.

Competition periods can demand extraordinary hours. Employees who carry those workloads should be recognized.

𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐭.
𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫.

𝐒𝐎𝐌𝐄 𝐎𝐅 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐒𝐄 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐂𝐈𝐏𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐄𝐒 𝐁𝐄𝐆𝐈𝐍 𝐎𝐍 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐅𝐈𝐄𝐋𝐃

Playing football alone does not qualify anyone to run the NFF.

𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 and 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩 still matter.

But former players already understand some of these disciplines.

A player operates inside a structure. The coach establishes standards, assigns responsibilities, evaluates performance and makes difficult decisions.

Players learn punctuality. They learn accountability.
They learn teamwork. They learn dependency. They learn conflict management. If one player abandons his position, the entire team can suffer.

Those lessons do not replace professional management training.

But when combined with education and proven leadership experience, they provide a useful foundation.

𝐀𝐆𝐄 𝐈𝐒 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐉𝐎𝐁 𝐃𝐄𝐒𝐂𝐑𝐈𝐏𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍

Age is sometimes raised when former Nigerian players are discussed for leadership, particularly when a candidate is in his seventies.

That is fair to examine. Ask about energy. Ask about technology. Ask about adaptability. Ask about succession. Ask whether the candidate can relate to and develop younger professionals.

But look at how the NFF actually operates.

The president is not expected to sit in Finance reconciling accounts. He is not booking airline tickets, processing visas, drafting every contract or running the Technical Department.

Those departments already have managers and professional staff doing the specialized work — including younger professionals who bring their own knowledge, skills and perspectives.

The president works through them. He receives briefings. He asks questions. He establishes priorities. He removes obstacles. He challenges people when necessary. He develops people. He holds them accountable.

So if the argument is that Nigerian football needs younger minds, 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧.

The real question is whether the person at the top knows how to listen to them, challenge them, develop them and bring their expertise together toward one objective.

Age can even become an asset when it comes with experience, judgment and perspective.

𝐀 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐞 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐠𝐞, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤, 𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐬, 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲

He has to know how to get the best out of that employee.

𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐦. 𝐈𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐨 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐦.

Running the NFF is not a 90-minute physical contest.

The president is not being selected to outrun younger men. 𝐇𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦.

𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐃𝐄𝐑𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐏 𝐈𝐒 𝐁𝐔𝐈𝐋𝐃𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐀 𝐒𝐘𝐒𝐓𝐄𝐌 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐎𝐔𝐓𝐋𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐒 𝐘𝐎𝐔

An NFF president does not need to be the federation’s best accountant, scheduler, lawyer, auditor or technical director.

The president must appoint competent people, respect professional boundaries, delegate authority, monitor performance, manage conflict, insist on documentation and act when standards are not met.

When one administration ends, the next should inherit reconciled accounts, documented obligations, functioning systems and institutional reserves where applicable — not unpaid bills and unanswered questions.

Not just memories. Not just promises. 𝐀 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐧𝐞.

𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐍 𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐄𝐗𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐋𝐘 𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐎𝐁𝐉𝐄𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐓𝐎 𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐌𝐄𝐑 𝐏𝐋𝐀𝐘𝐄𝐑𝐒?

𝐋𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐝𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞.

𝐈𝐧 𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟗, 𝐔𝐒$𝟐𝟑𝟔,𝟎𝟎𝟎 earmarked for Super Eagles World Cup qualifying activities was reported missing from the federation’s secretariat safe.

𝐈𝐧 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟎, 𝐒𝐚𝐧𝐢 𝐋𝐮𝐥𝐮 𝐀𝐛𝐝𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐡𝐢, 𝐀𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐳𝐞 𝐔𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐠𝐛𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐦, 𝐓𝐚𝐢𝐰𝐨 𝐎𝐠𝐮𝐧𝐣𝐨𝐛𝐢 and 𝐃𝐫. 𝐁𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐣𝐢 𝐎𝐣𝐨-𝐎𝐛𝐚 were arraigned over allegations involving more than 𝐍𝟏.𝟓 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 in World Cup-related expenditure, including specific dollar-denominated allegations of 𝐔𝐒$𝟏𝟐𝟓,𝟎𝟎𝟎, 𝐔𝐒$𝟐𝟓𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎 and 𝐔𝐒$𝟒𝟎𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎. They were later discharged and acquitted.

𝐈𝐧 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟔, during the 𝐀𝐦𝐚𝐣𝐮 𝐏𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐤 administration, 𝐔𝐒$𝟖𝟎𝟐,𝟎𝟎𝟎 in FIFA development funds became the subject of documentation questions, with further development funding reportedly withheld.

More recently, under the 𝐈𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐡𝐢𝐦 𝐆𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐮-led administration, a 𝐍𝟏𝟐 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 Federal Government intervention fund for national-team obligations came under 𝐄𝐅𝐂𝐂 and 𝐈𝐂𝐏𝐂 investigation.

Coaches and former national-team personnel have also continued to raise claims over salaries, bonuses and allowances years after the work was done.

𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬.

Yet former Nigerian internationals are repeatedly told:
“𝐁𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐛𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐅𝐅.”

𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐞. Playing football alone does not qualify anyone.

But here is the question that should follow: W𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐛𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐞𝐝?

It has not guaranteed financial discipline. It has not guaranteed transparency. It has not guaranteed that coaches and players will be paid on time. It has not guaranteed institutional accountability.

So why should a distinguished football career become an argument against a candidate who also possesses education, management experience, integrity and a proven leadership record?

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲. 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐞𝐧𝐝.

We are not saying every former international should run the NFF.
Some should not. But if competence is the standard, apply it to everybody.

𝐅𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐛𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐮𝐬. 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐮𝐬 𝐞𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫.

𝐆𝐈𝐕𝐄 𝐔𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐎𝐏𝐏𝐎𝐑𝐓𝐔𝐍𝐈𝐓𝐘 — 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐍 𝐇𝐎𝐋𝐃 𝐔𝐒 𝐀𝐂𝐂𝐎𝐔𝐍𝐓𝐀𝐁𝐋𝐄

Qualified former Nigerian players are not asking for the federation because we wore the green-and-white shirt.

We are asking for a fair opportunity to compete on 𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞, 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 and 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲.

If a former footballer cannot satisfy those requirements, do not give him the job.

But when one has educated himself, developed professionally, managed people and built a credible leadership record, do not move the goalposts because his first profession was football.

We have now laid out the management process. The departments already exist. Experienced staff are already in place. Responsibilities can be delegated. Performance can be measured. Finances can be tracked. Conflict can be managed. Accountability can be enforced.

So perhaps the question should now be asked differently:

𝐂𝐚𝐧 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐞𝐫 𝐍𝐢𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 — 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞, 𝐚 𝐛𝐨𝐝𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 — 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐅𝐅 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐟𝐟 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞?

The process described in this article is there for the reader to examine.

Do not judge us only by the profession we started with. Judge us by what we have learned, what we have managed, what we have built and what we are prepared to be accountable for.

𝐆𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 Then judge us by the same standards: 𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲, 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐬.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐲. The 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐬𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠.