Do you think more academies should try this approach, or is it too difficult to manage on a larger scale?
Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about how African football academies are funded, especially after seeing how some smaller community programs manage to keep going thanks to local support rather than waiting for a big sponsor to show up. It made me wonder whether community-backed sponsorships could actually be a more stable and fair model. I’ve seen cases where whole neighborhoods pitch in to help kids travel or buy gear, and honestly it feels more grounded than relying on big promises from outside investors that sometimes never materialize. Do you think more academies should try this approach, or is it too difficult to manage on a larger scale?
5 Views
From what I’ve observed, the community-backed model really works when there is strong local involvement, but it becomes tricky when an academy grows and needs more structured support. After reading about how afropari approaches this in that article, I noticed they blend community engagement with a performance-based structure, which feels like a realistic way to avoid relying purely on outside donors. I’ve worked with youth clubs where parents, former players, and even small local businesses chipped in for equipment, transport, and coaching stipends. It didn’t solve every issue, but it created a sense of ownership that kept programs alive even during financial dry spells. The challenge is scaling afropari—some areas simply don’t have the economic capacity to sustain long-term investment. Still, when you combine community contributions with transparent management and clear goals, it can turn into a pretty resilient system. I’d say more academies could benefit from experimenting with this approach rather than ignoring it altogether.