The Michael Vick of the PGA Tour

Tripp Isenhour doesn't exactly strike fear and trepidation in the hearts of his fellow PGA Tour members, but birds everywhere are going into hiding when he reaches for his 7-iron.

Isenhour is being charged with birdslaughter after nailing a red-shouldered hawk with a golf stroke, allegedly on purpose.

Isenhour, who finished the 2007 ranked 105th on the tour, was filming a TV show called "Shoot like a Pro" in mid-December, when the bird had the nerve to squawk. It ruined the take, so naturally, he fired off a shot at the bird to scare it off.

But the bird, which had been about 300 yards away, ventured perilously closer to the wild-eyed Isenhour. Which is when, according to some on the scene, Isenhour muttered something like "I'll get him now." Isenhour didn't get him on the first shot -- he's no Tiger Woods, you know -- but his persistence paid off, and moments later the bird fell to the ground, and it was pronounced dead at the scene.

Someone at the scene gave the bird a proper burial at the course, probably a few feet from the second cut of rough. But the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission later dug it up, launched an investigation, and got Isenhour charged with cruelty to animals.

Isenhour has, of course, launched an apology, saying that he is an "animal lover," has adopted three ugly cats from the local shelter, and all the rest. But if the bird lovers have their way, Isenhour could do up to 14 months in jail.

If only the bird had kept its stupid beak shut.

Show me the money: Pre-arbitration players unhappy with contract "negotiations"

When the Phillies raised Ryan Howard's salary to $900,000 last spring, they may have set a challenging precedent for other Major League teams.

As a player with less than three years of Major League experience, Howard could have been paid as little as the league minimum without much recourse for objection. But after a season in which he hit .313 with 58 HR and 149 RBI, the Phillies wanted to reward him with a long-term deal; the sides couldn't agree, but Philadelphia gave Howard a significant raise anyway.

In the first several weeks of spring training, several talented young players have announced their expectation of a big payday, or voiced disapproval when teams have renewed their contracts at or near the league minimum.

Phils pitcher Cole Hamels called his $100,000 raise to $500,000 for this season a "low blow;" Orioles outfielder Nick Markakis, who was renewed at $455,000, groused that "I don't have much of a choice;" and when asked about his $670,000 contract renewal, Milwaukee first baseman Prince Fielder said "I'm not happy about it at all."

And then there is Boston closer Jonathan Papelpon, who is campaigning with the media to get a bigger raise than the expected $550,00 contract renewal: "I feel like with me being at the top of my position, I feel like that standard needs to be set, and I’m the one who set that standard."

Most people don't work in jobs where complaining about our salaries will do any good, nor do most employees ever have the option to ask for a certain amount of money and have an arbiter rule if it is reasonable. But almost everyone is familiar with the concept of "paying your dues," and in that one sense we can relate to these talented, but admittedly underpaid, youngsters.

Any player is worth what the market will (or in this case, would) pay; a team with the chance to sign Hamels tomorrow would probably shell out five years and $60 million, if not more. But the rules in place are designed to protect the rights of the owners and place a high premium on the minor league system.

Can you imagine what would happen if players could become free agents after a single season?

Players like Hamels, Markakis, Fielder and Papelbon will get their dues -- eventually. And they should take comfort in the fact that most likely, they will one day sign a multi-year contract in the twilight of their careers. They will under-perform but be overpaid, probably by tens of millions of dollars.

See? It all evens out in the end.

The beginning of the end for Roger Federer?

For most tennis players, two losses in a row is a hiccup, not a slump. But for Roger Federer, a second losing "streak" in four months might represent a chink in the armor.

Federer won his 12th Grand Slam at the U.S. Open last fall, but he's looked rather mortal since. He lost to Novak Djokovic in the semifinals of the Australian Open, and fell in the first round of the Dubai Tennis Championships Monday.

True, the loss to Andy Murray was Federer's first venture onto a court since the loss to Djokovic at the end of January, and he should be forgiven for a bit of rustiness. And Murray is no slouch, especially for a first round opponent.

But I often think about the pressure associated with being the world's top player, especially for such a long period of time -- currently at 213 weeks and counting -- and wonder if Federer ever gets tired of it. It takes a different kind of mental fortitude to stave off all comers than to be gunning for the top.

At 26, Federer is by no means over the hill, and I believe that he has a lot of high-level tennis left in him if he wants it. But if he doesn't want to remain atop the hill -- if Federer decides he's had enough -- there are plenty of others who are waiting hungrily to snare his spot. Djokovic. Murray. Rafael Nadal. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga.

With 12 Grand Slam titles, Federer needs three to surpass Pete Sampras for the all-time mark, and I wouldn't bet against him getting them at Wimbledon this year and next, and probably another hard court title or two between the U.S. and Australian Open in the next few years.

I don't think Monday's loss was the beginning of the end of Federer's reign of dominance -- I think the loss to Djokovic was. Federer may indeed be the greatest of all time, but I'm starting to wonder if his time's almost up.

About that scholarship offer... We were kinda kidding

A high school recruit is suing the University of Hawaii and defensive line coach Jeff Reinebold, who he says promised him a scholarship but later rescinded it.

The recruit claims that after an unofficial visit, Reinebold called and offered him a scholarship. But there was a catch.

"Right before he offered it," the recruit recalled, "He said 'If we offer you a scholarship, we want you to be 100 percent committed to us, and we'll be 100 percent committed to you.' ... I told him I was 100 percent committed, and I committed right there."

That commitment, the recruit claims, kept him from pursuing other opportunities to play football, which included a written offer from the might Division I-AA Portland State. And when head coach June Jones left for Southern Methodist, the recruit got a call saying that the scholarship he'd counted on wouldn't be available after all. (Shoulda gotten it in writing...)

So now he's suing, but the kid insists that it has nothing to do with money.

"I'm not trying to get any money. I'm just trying to get my scholarship that I was promised 10 months ago," he said.

Let's say he wins the lawsuit, and the judge awards him a full ride scholarship to play for the Warriors. How do his teammates react to him? Will the coaches treat him well? Extra wind sprints for the wannabe is probably more like it.

College football recruiting is a high stakes game, and sometimes innocent kids get trapped in sticky situations. But other times -- remember the kid who staged a press conference to sign with a school that never offered him a scholarship? -- the kid and his parents get so excited about the prospect of big-time college football that they forget to think.

The picture is not completely random. Search for "Hawaii football scholarship" on Google Images and you'll see what I mean. For more on this story, check out the nice piece by Sports Illustrated writer And Staples.