Talk:Takkarist McKinley

Failed physicals
If a player is claimed off waivers, their contract is automatically inherited by the claiming team. When a contract is originally signed, the execution of it is typically contingent on the player passing a physical. However, for a claimed contract, I do not believe it needs to be executed since it was never terminated. In fact, it appears McKinley also failed his physical with the Raiders, which is why they placed him on injured reserve. The other two teams who claimed him had the same option of placing him on IR, but instead chose to waive him with the "failed physical" designations. I think the prose of the article is fine as is, there's no reason to have two stub sections about his five-day tenures with the teams while he went through COVID protocols, but I think the infobox should include the 49ers and Bengals as teams he was under contract with for consistency purposes. Eagles 24/7 (C)  20:59, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure if the ping here went through since it was a new section, so trying again. Eagles 24/7 (C)  22:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh it did, I simply forgot to respond to it. Anyway, while you make fair points I feel like not even being on a team's roster for 24 hours due to failing a qualifying condition is really infobox-worthy. The fact that the Raiders placed him on IR instead of voiding his contract like the other two is more significant, in my opinion. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 01:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Technically, he was on the Bengals' roster with a roster exemption for six days and on the 49ers' roster with a roster exemption for two days. And as I said above, waiver claims are not contingent on passing a team physical. Also, the Bengals and 49ers did not "void" his contract, they cut him the same way the Falcons originally did. I am unlikely to find proof but I'm sure he was paid for the near-week he was on the Bengals' roster. This matter is a triviality but still worth discussing IMO. Eagles 24/7 (C)  03:01, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , you may be 100% correct but I personally still feel like this isn't infobox worthy. Maybe I'm in the minority however. ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 19:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you provide a source that shows he wasn't roster exempt prior to failing his physical and being released? ~ <b style="color: #660000;">Dissident93</b> (<b style="color: #D18719;">talk</b>) 20:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think I have to. Just because a team is given a roster exemption for a player does not mean the player was not part of the active roster. The roster exemption just means that the Bengals and 49ers did not have to cut a player to make room for McKinley. Pcurry2005 (talk)