1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

FGCU's Enfield may have embellished his business background

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by NDJournalist, Mar 25, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 2 of 2
  1. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    Fucking a supermodel.

    Except I don't know if you'd call her a supermodel. Never SI. Sounds more like a mid-major model.
     
    LongTimeListener, Mar 25, 2013
    #13
  2. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    "Let's see, should I dick around with a bunch of assholes who can't get their facts straight or should I go home and have victory sex with my smokin' hot wife?"...
     
    Armchair_QB, Mar 26, 2013
    #14
  3. Stoney

    Stoney Well-Known Member

    Really, then why is your thread title so patently false?

    There's no allegation that Enfield "may have embellished" anything. That some other media guy might have reported somewhat inaccurately how he came into his fortune, without consulting Enfield, does nothing to change that. Nor is he in any way responsible for inaccurate reports by others that he had nothing to do with.
     
    Stoney, Mar 26, 2013
    #15
  4. Riptide

    Riptide Well-Known Member

    Suck puppet!
     
    Riptide, Mar 26, 2013
    #16
  5. Riptide

    Riptide Well-Known Member

    As far as facts being embellished, I noticed the other day that at least one SportsJournalists.com poster had turned the company's reported value of $100 million into Enfield being worth $100 million himself.

    And that's one way facts get "embellished."
     
    Riptide, Mar 26, 2013
    #17
Page 2 of 2
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page