I wholeheartedly agree with McCaffrey being the selection IF available. He and Ty would give defenses fits.
The obvious holes on D really should be addressed in FA. The CBs may in fact develop but I wouldn't bet a SB ring on it. A DE like Campbell would make me ecstatic. Clark and Lowry look promising, but the need to have guys rotating was made clear with the second half collapse of Atlanta.

For the most part i agree with what your saying Cory.

The part I disagree about is the part that Lacy won't be back. I think he will be back.

One thing I do question though is what style of RB best fits the Packers offense. Lacy brings some contrast to the offense. And the offense definitely can use that in its offense. But after he got hurt and Montgomery began playing RB, the offense really opened up. They were able to do more things schematically with Montgomery then they could with Lacy.

I think the Packers could use a quick change of direction type of RB who can catch passes. One that could play out of the shotgun which is how they line up most of the time.

I want Lacy back but I want to see them draft a RB by the middle rounds. A guy who can come in and contribute. Every year there are RBs that are drafted in the middle rounds that make contributions and become really good players.
This year guys like Paul Perkins, Jordan Howard, Wendell Smallwood all were drafted in the 5th round and contributed to their teams. Howard was really good.
Last year, Jay Ajayi was a 5th round pick.
2014 - Devonta Freeman, James White were 4th round picks.

Its time to reinvest into the RB position.

So, finally we come to agreement... New football is more about football players than specialists... That is very interesting...
I hear lot of calling TT, who claimed 3 years ago (before 2014 draft!) that he is looking for football players... Versatility players not specialists...
Case closed. I agree completely with you. Very soon teams with more football players will have more wins than a team with specialists...
EDIT: Just to add. Do you know why Aaron Rodgers is so good? Because he can play many positions good and few possitions excellent. That is why Aaron is so unique.

The Packers used Monty with great success and many thought he could/should have been an even bigger part of every gameday plan. Green Bay has and wanted to use Lacy like NE used Blount...as a sledgehammer against defenses especially in the 4th qtr. They couldn't in the SB because they were so far behind and had to pass on every single down. Outside of needing to pass on every down, you need a RB that can get those 1-2 yards for the first down. Do you think if the Falcons had Lacy in the 4th qtr., they would have won that game? One other impression, if the Cowboys had McCaffery instead of Elliott, would they had been as successful?

I think Green Bay is still trying to process the use of Monty as a RB and hasn't used him enough to optimize their offense. Lacy, who is the battering ram they need for short yardage, is the perfect complement for this offense. His ability to catch the ball makes him extremely dangerous and when healthy is the complete back. So McCaffery is a better RB than Monty, but I don't think he would be a solution for what the Green Bay Packers need as their other RB.

" It’s why the Cowboys didn’t think twice about letting DeMarco Murray walk and it’s why the Texans didn’t lose any sleep about watching Arian Foster leave."

DeMarco Murray and Arian Foster have been premier 3-down backs. Murray has caught 206 passes over the last 4 seasons...better than 50 per. Foster, in his prime, was catching 50-60 passes. Those players were allowed to walk for other reasons: Murray because the Doughboys were lacking in cap space, had an emerging OL, and couldn't rationalize paying what he was asking. Foster because he was suffering major injuries year after year. In either case, the team that made that decision didn't deem the player worth what it would cost to keep them, but it wasn't for lack of versatility.

"The days of the lumbering back...." are gone. Exactly, which is why it would non prodcutive to bring back Lacy. He would make more sense in someone elses offense, not the Packers.

McCarthy gives lip service to "we want to run the ball"...no they don't and to be honest that should not be the primary focus with this team. We are a pass first team , should stay that way, and having additional weapons in the form of running backs that can contribute more in the passing game than Lacy could ever hope to would be prudent.

However, I'm not sure McCarthy would know what to do with such a back or backs.

If we need a big lumbering back to run into the pile, we have Ripkowski. Speed, Speed, Speed....desperately needed on defense, and more on offense would be an asset as well.

Why not call Brady "the best ever". I have never seen a guy who hasn't played with a premier deep threat receiver control a game like he does. For the last 8 years every defense knows that he is going to throw the ball within 15 yards of the LOS or to the RB out of the backfield and nobody can stop him. Despite the critical drops he still got it done. You need the "man" to play with less talent.

We have our James White and Garrett Blount. Lacy and Montgomery can do what NE does on offense if we chose to live underneath. MM and Rodgers prefer the vertical game which we are not really suited for - but we like our 3rd and 3 shots. What we really miss is a quick twitch Julian Edelman (sorry Cobb). He is the go-to guy for Brady.

Either way, when the Packers play a control style of offense and nibble away at the smaller stuff, it is hard to stop Rodger's accuracy.

I do agree that we need to use the quick, change of pace back who catches out of the backfield. We are just starting to discover that part of the game.

If you think this is a "new" thing then you are very, very, young and/or know very little of football history. Marcus Allen, Larry Centers, Keith Byars, Marshall Faulk, Roger Craig, Rickey Watters, etc..... This is nothing new. Offensive versatility was pioneered by men like Gilman and Walsh.

While I agree that the Packers can use another versatile back versatility has been around in the NFL for a long time. Which back has been more versatile than Frank Gifford or the Packers own Paul Hornung. Hornung could run, throw, catch, block and even place kick. He had good speed not great speed and he had enough power to get the short yardage especially in the goal line offense. For today's Packers they have Monty. They need to draft another RB, possibly similar to James White and maybe a short, tough yardage guy, although they have Rip. In any case Starks should be done and Lacy should only come back on a very Packer friendly contract and only if he is below 240. Otherwise, chuck him. As for Brady, I thought that he was correct when he stated that James White should have been the SB MVP, he played great. White and Hightower on defense made the NE comeback possible. Brady was the beneficiary of an exhausted Falcon defense and very poor coaching by Atlanta. Thanks, Since '61

I think the packers should still go for BPA. or STAR. Even if that player is a TE or LB. I think the bigger need is speed. TT stayed to fix and what ifs. It's time to go after the stars of the draft. Not the square's to put in the round holes. The way we have patched a hole is concerning. It just hasn't produced the results to take us to the unbeaten days. Fix the hole through Free Agency . Draft the stud. Example: He drafted A-rod for the future and knew he'd be a star. TT has gotten away from that. Draft the star ,not the need. The need can be fixed with free Agancy now. The undrafted players are making this team. And he's had to many Busts. TT needs to change it up again.

Wasn't that the point of Lacy and Montgomery? One bulldozer and one more versatile. A respected running game opens the passing game - especially the short passing game and the middle of the field.

I would be in favor of giving Lacy an incentive based contract. Packers haven't had a tackle breaking back like this for a long time.

The problem is the defense. Let's not lose focus (as if it is up to us<g>). The offense when it heals up should be fine. Any spare money should be directed to the defense. Many have been saying that AR has been carrying MM. It would be nice to have the defense carry DC so even when he rushes 3 on 3rd and long, we aren't worried! DC played this perfectly - he saw he wasn't getting enough focus and knew that he wouldn't be held personally responsible so he let the D fail. JUST JOKING ABOUT THIS LAST SENTENCE.

No point in spending a high draft pick on a receiving RB that Rodgers will just ignore.

If the Packers don't bring in some FAs or trade for some defense they need to spend this entire draft on CB, OLB, DL and OL depth.

dobber is right in that this year there was no Lacy and Monty only Lacy and then Monty.
TT will be drafting another RB and probably get a couple in FA. Depth hurt this year and competition is always good.

Corey I disagree. First unless im mistaken mike will be the head coach. Mike hates to practice thus mike wants to have guys who know the routine, same routine dfferent year. Mik keeps things simple, no crossing rotes, screen plays, mx en up offenses. Mke loves big straight ahead running backs. He doesnt possess the intellegence to run a sophisicated offense so lacy will be ba k because he said he wants lacy. Nothing will change next year because f mike. This team needs a lot on both sides the ball. They may need more then any ther team.

I think Lacy comes back and performs well after being a spectator last season Monty is the versatile back he had that one game similar to James white when he had about 150 yards and a few touchdowns , see if Michael does well in camp and I think that's a pretty decent backfield, I want the first 3 picks at least used on defense . The best defensive players available.

The Packers desperately need some young talent to rush the QB. They also need speed, speed and more speed at LB. Really, if you are going to run the 3-4 the LBs need to be the stars of the show. I just don't see spending a first-rounder on a "versatile" running back when we have so many holes at full-time positions.

Packers just released Starks. Thank you, James, for all your hard work. You were a big part of the Packers' Super Bowl run and victory in 2010-11.

Versatile RB's raise hell with defenses. The ability to catch passes, the threat of the screen (which the Pack used to be able to do with great success), and if they can get around the corner is a great weapon. Lacy, if healthy and off the jelly doughnuts, can pound the ball up the gut, and would be most effective in the 4th quarter, when DB's no longer want to get run over. Blend all of that with Rodgers passing ability and you can beat anyone. Fix the secondary and the ability to put pressure on a QB and you have the making of a Super Bowl Champion. All and all, the DEFENSE has to be fixed first.

Sam Shields released is expected but still sad.