.

Submitted by contributing writer Brad King

Scouring the Kentucky blogs, news sites, message boards today, it's hard to imagine that just 15 months ago those very media outlets were not concerned with the recruitment of 8th grade stand-outs or the eligibility of DeAndre Liggins. In fact, a commitment from Patrick Patterson seemed to be a long shot, Florida point guard Jai Lucas was considered the future of Kentucky's back court, and Joakim Noah was public enemy No. 1 . In the midst of all this, one central question remained at the heart of every Kentucky fan. Should Tubby stay or should he go?

Any UK fan observing this phenomena knows full well the arguments that seemed to go in circles. Tubby can't recruit. Tubby can't win close games. Tubby is lazy. Tubby can't develop talent. Kentucky basketball is slipping. Tubby can't recruit blue chip talent. The list goes on forever.

In his first season, Billy Gillispie was forced to go in to battle with a talent lacking, injury ridden roster that struggled to learn the new coach's system through out the season. However, due to the maniacal recruiting habits of Gillispie, his recruiting philosophy compared to Tubby Smith's is quite evident.

The most glaring difference between the two coach's recruiting approach is that Tubby Smith had a conservative and stringent recruiting policy. Gillispie, on the other hand, leaves no stone unturned. Rest assured, if there is a player out there that is good enough to play for Kentucky and has any interest in Kentucky, Gillispie will find him. And what does age matter? If the kid is good, the kid is good.

Tubby Smith's biggest strength was also his biggest weakness at the University of Kentucky. Loyalty. Where as Gillispie is locking up commitments 4 years in the future, Tubby Smith more often than not was left battling for late spring recruits in an effort to fill the gaps on the roster after holding out on his top prospects. Lukasz Obrzut, Bobby Perry, Shaggari Alleyne, Jared Carter, and Rekalin Sims were all spring pick ups for Kentucky. Uncoincidentally, the players that comprised these teams also contributed to 2 of the worst seasons in Kentucky's illustrious history.

This begs the question is Gillispie a better recruiter?

There is no doubt that Gillispie's wide net strategy to recruiting reaps rewards. Blue chippers such as such as DeAndre Liggins and Dominique Ferguson have committed to Kentucky due to that very philosophy. However, where as Tubby Smith was left with subpar talent due to procrastination, Billy Gillispie has now acquired seemingly subpar talent due to over-anticipation.

Of Kentucky's 7 future commitments from 2009 – 2012, 2 players remained ranked in the Rivals 150. When asked about Dakotah Euton's performance at the Bob Gibbon's Tournament of Champions, Rivals.com Justin Young said, “At this point, I can't see him starting for Western Kentucky.” Needless to say, not a very glowing endorsement from a national recruiting analyst.

KC Ross Miller, a player once thought to be the top point guard in the 2010 class when he committed to Kentucky, remains unranked by Rivals and Scout. KC does have an upside, whether he reaches the potential that the staff believes he has is a different question.

Michael Avery is so young that few have seen him play, and most that have, are skeptical that he will have the talent to play at the D-1 level. Known as a shooter at this point, and not much else.

GJ Vilarino 2009, unranked by Rivals and Scout. Yet, Vilarino is a speedy guard that can dunk the ball, which could be beneficial in his career.

Vinnie Zollo, while standing at 6'7 and having a size 18 shoe, the talent of Zollo is very raw at this point as expected for a freshman in high school. But will Zollo develop past that?

The point in all this is not to downplay the significance of Kentucky's commitments, but it's quite possible that the type of players that has doomed Kentucky in the past with Tubby Smith, could quite possibly doom Kentucky in the future with Billy Gillispie.

At the very worst, Kentucky's future commitments are role players, and there is nothing wrong with role players. Every team needs role players. Yet, a team of role players is nothing but prey for a team of All-Americans. From 2009-2012, it is essential that the staff fills in the gaps with blue chip type players or UK basketball could very well end where it ended as Tubby Smith departed.

While players such as Jon Hood and Dominique Ferguson are surefire impact players at the next level, the verdict is very much still out on Billy Gillispie and his recruiting. To this point, only Patrick Patterson and Alex Legion are the Gillispie recruited players to don blue and white. Legion split and Patterson was an established Kentucky target before Gillispie ever arrived on campus. Hence, Gillispie's talent evaluation is really yet to be seen.

How do you guys feel about this? We would love to hear your thoughts and opinions below.