In fact, when the Raiders move to Las Vegas in 2020, there will no longer be any NFL team that shares its stadium with an MLB team.
You forgot Toronto’s horrific Exhibition Stadium, replaced in 1989 by SkyDome (technically a multipurpose stadium but really, really primarily a baseball park) and the Minnesota situation, where the old Metropolitan Stadium, which was multipurpose but not bad for its time, was replaced by the Metrodome, which was terrible, and which has subsequently been replaced by Target Field.
There will NEVER be an NFL franchise based in London. Londoners don’t give a shit about the NFL. And before you start whining, “Oh yeah, then how come every NFL game played there is sold out, what about that smart guy?”
NONE of the games sold out, unless by sold out you mean more than 80% of the tickets were given away for free. And did you take a good look at the shots of the fans in the stands, which teams jersey/shirt were most of them wearing? Answer: EVERY team, because there is no favorite NFL team in London. There aren’t any petitions online or otherwise begging for the Jaguars to relocate and they are the only team that might, and that’s simply because of the owner but he’s not gonna do it 'cause if he did it would cost him more than $400,000,000 in relocation and other fees to the other league owners.
For the record, I think that an NFL franchise outside of North America is a terrible idea, because of the travel times, if nothing else.
But, it’s clear that the powers that be in the league office have been working on building an NFL fan base in England for years, and that they feel it has a lot of potential for hosting a team. However, the NFL’s interest in London, despite all of the reasons why it wouldn’t make for good football, are emblematic of the league’s unquenchable thirst for more money.
No, I don’t think there’s much clamoring for the Jaguars, specifically, there, but the fact that Shad Khan has been willing to give up a home game in Jacksonville every year to play there will undoubtedly give him the inside track, if he wants it, if and when the league decides to put a team there.
I could see an NFL team in Mexico some day. The sport is pretty popular there, especially the Raiders.
Mexico City could host a team, possibly.
You seriously and honestly believe in your heart that the owners of mlb/nfl/nba teams give a shit about ‘the fans’?:rolleyes:x20,000 on your gullibility.
Remind me again how many NFL franchises have relocated or will relocate in the next few years. Is that happening because the fans want it to happen? Please.
Yeah, I’m sure the NFL would just adore having a franchise located in a country where more than 500,000 people have been murdered by drug cartels over the last decade.
Your statement proves you know little if anything about how much extra security the NFL has to provide whenever they have a game in Mexico. when the Patriots and raiders played there last season the extra security cost $20,000,000. For one game. You think an NFL owner is gonna throw out $160,000,000 a year just for security? Please.
I’ve spent a lot of time in London the past 3 years or so as well as regularly following UK sports websites. The NFL isn’t catching on at all. Last year, the main NFL coverage was about Trump and the anthem protests. Are there some fans? Sure, just as there are cricket fans in the USA. These days, you can follow just about any sport worldwide. But, I imagine a lot of the tickets sold for the London games are going to expats or people visiting from abroad.
Take a look at how BBC Sport shows the NFL standings. NFL Standings - American Football - BBC Sport
Points for and Points against are not at all important in the NFL.
I did say some day. I didn’t specify how many decades in the future. 
I disagree. When I used to (successfully) do my weekly picks for the card at work, I based them largely on point differentials.
Ummm…take a look at the standings board on the NFL’s own web site, from last season:
https://www.nfl.com/standings/division/2017/REG
Immediately after the winning percent (which the BBC site has as the final column) are “PF” (Points For) and “PA” (Points Against).
Now, it may well be that the NFL doesn’t have a deep fan base in England (though I’m not convinced of that), but I don’t think that the BBC site shows any particular ignorance about the sport.
You’re correct. and yet I’ve never looked at PF or PA in the NFL standings.
Here’s ESPN’s page which does include PF and PA, but they’re over in the right.
As an aside, I believe Wrigley still holds the record for most NFL games hosted in a stadium. There’s a stumper trivia question for you.
It looks like Wrigley held the lead for a while, but no more. 
The LA Coliseum pulled ahead in 1994, the Raiders’ last year there; they’re building a little more separation with the Rams there now.
Giants Stadium had 16+ games a year for a while, so they’re currently on top by a bit. Soldier Field and Jack Murphy/Qualcomm/SDCCU Stadium pulled ahead of Wrigley in 2013; I believe they’re second and third now. LA Coliseum is fourth, Cleveland Municipal Stadium is fifth, and Wrigley is sixth for now – but Lambeau Field and Arrowhead Stadium will pass it this year.
Source: http://www.footballgeography.com/list-of-every-nfl-game-location-since-the-leagues-founding-in-1920/ with 2013-17 done in my head (hence no precise values)
I’ve been to Arrowhead and it’s a PERFECT stadium for football. While I’ve never been to the Royals ballpark from what I can see on TV it’s iconic with the fountains being groundbreaking influencing the design of many other MLB stadiums including the Marlins, Phillies, Angels and many others.
I don’t see any relocation efforts for either of the teams being very popular, as a matter of fact, talk has been about new NHL or NBA teams here!
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Ignorance fought. 
indeed.