Takk failed physical again

[Trademark]

Guess we can put those speculations to rest that he didn't want to play here guess he's just a bum

"The 49ers will waive McKinley with a failed physical designation, according to Matt Barrows of TheAthletic.com"


https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/11/20/takk-mckinley-fails-49ers-physical/amp/

[GreenCornBengal]

49ers are 4-6 and 4th in their division. Maybe he thinks they stink too!

[HarleyDog]

(11-20-2020, 06:53 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: 49ers are 4-6 and 4th in their division. Maybe he thinks they stink too!

I think it leans more into the category of unhealthy. However, it brings me to question, can a team release the results to another team of their findings of a failed physical? There's the HIPAA thing, and then there's the doctor thing. I don't think Dr's sharing information on the current health status of an individual would be blocked. Would it? If not, then information given to the Bengals (in order to not play for them, if that was the case) would be a case of "you screwed yourself." 

But then again, if they claimed him, he didn't have to visit so maybe that's not a reasonable speculation. Or is it? Hell, IDK. Who want's a beer?

[jfkbengals]

(11-20-2020, 07:45 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: I think it leans more into the category of unhealthy. However, it brings me to question, can a team release the results to another team of their findings of a failed physical? There's the HIPAA thing, and then there's the doctor thing. I don't think Dr's sharing information on the current health status of an individual would be blocked. Would it? If not, then information given to the Bengals (in order to not play for them, if that was the case) would be a case of "you screwed yourself." 

But then again, if they claimed him, he didn't have to visit so maybe that's not a reasonable speculation. Or is it? Hell, IDK. Who want's a beer?