To be fair you could have said the same for MLS based on NASL. Times have changed, even from the mid-90s in terms of what could and would succeed globally.
Imagine had in 1968, instead of trying to start a coast to coast pro league in America, New York City got a Seria A or English First Division team. It would have worked as the NYC market would have seen it for what it was. The best of the sport being played locally and not some league of college kids and ageing cripples.
NASL had their peak though in an era where there were far fewer soccer loving immigrants than there are now. The quality of play was also very different - far slower but also far more skilled.
Back in 1968, the English first-division champion, Manchester City, was defeated 3-0 by the "aging cripples" known as the Oakland Clippers.
I think you can say the same for England, there are far more people in England and Europe as a whole that are knowledgable about the NFL or even MLB than there were even a short 15 years ago.
Back in 2010 NBA champions LA Lakers were defeated by FC Barcelona (the basketball version) Friendlies mean nothing. No matter what decade.
Quiet guys, you're going to make the Met-no-stars fans cry enough tears to fill up that massive Emirates Cup they have in their trophy case. It's the one right next to their Western Conference Championship and all the nothing, nothing at all.
The article didn't state anything. It was an opinion by a North American Anglophile who has a very limited understanding of North American sports and apparently and even more limited understanding of European sports if he thinks the experience is somehow more real over there. Fans have been complaining for a while about being priced out of games.
An NFL league could not be successful in the UK as with virtually every country in the world except the US, I think that is accepted, but that does not necessarily mean that American football can not become successful outside of the US. A way forward may be to have a single NFL team based in important markets (countries) which I am sure could and would be well supported from a different element of casual fans every month or two weeks or whatever in different venues. The UK might have a game in Wembley then in Old Trafford and so on - a sort of travelling circus. (Please don't infer I am comparing NFL with a circus) and I think this is the sort of strategy being adopted only on a more experimental and cautious basis. If even a country can not support a single franchise then make it continental based. I have no idea of the logistics involved but I'm sure it would be very difficult though not infeasible. Perhaps a new franchise would need to be created - would anyone invest in such a venture? That is the only way I see American football getting a foothold and good exposure outside of the US with a view to growing the sport. Maybe it is just a harebrained scheme from someone who doesn't know enough about it.