You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


This is the eighth installment of a 10-part series that reviews every Bears position group on offense and defense, while also taking a quick look at potential free-agent targets and the top prospects in the upcoming NFL draft.

When Chicago Bears chairman George McCaskey, president Ted Phillips or new general manager Phil Emery speaks about the team’s situation at linebacker they’re usually working to pry off the hourglass always attached to the discussion.

Age isn’t a factor they say. The duo of Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs -- 33 and 31, respectively -- only serve as evidence of the brass’ assertion.

“I’ve heard the rumblings that there’s a lot of age on our roster, defensively,” Emery said when asked specifically about Urlacher and the linebacker position. “I kind of look at it this way: it’s not a numerical number we’re looking at [when determining whether a player is getting too old to contribute]. It’s the way you’re making plays. Are you being a productive player? If it was just a miracle number, and the number of gray hairs, I wouldn’t be standing here today.”

Urlacher and Briggs combined in 2011 for 282 tackles, four interceptions, 10 pass breakups, two forced fumbles and 11 quarterback pressures in being named to their eighth and seventh Pro Bowls. Briggs eclipsed 100 tackles for the eighth consecutive season while Urlacher accomplished the feat for a franchise-record 11th time.

Are they slowing down? Maybe, but the duo continues to find ways to compensate for physical limitations by sharpening the mental sides of their games. Still, at some point, the Bears need to find the duo’s eventual replacements.

Emery has made it clear he’d prefer to replenish the talent pool through the draft. But it’s unlikely the Bears will use a high pick in April to draft a linebacker.

The new GM will also have to at some point address Briggs’ demands for a new contract.

THE CURRENT ROSTER

Brian Urlacher: Enters the final season of a five-year extension signed in 2008, and is set to receive $7.5 million in base salary ($9.7 million cap charge). Still one of the NFL’s best middle linebackers, Urlacher hasn’t discussed his contract status. But surely Urlacher would like to finish his career in Chicago and appears healthy -- and skilled -- enough to play at a high level for multiple years beyond 2012. Urlacher tied for third in interceptions (3) in 2011, and is one of just four players in NFL history to post more than 40 (41.5) career sacks and 20 (21) INTs. Urlacher sprained the MCL in his left knee in the season finale, but the injury won’t require surgery or a lengthy rehabilitation process that would put his availability for 2012 in question.

Lance Briggs doesn't have much leverage in his push for a new contract. Jamie Squire/Getty Images

Lance Briggs: Was vocal prior to the 2011 season about the desire to receive a raise, or at least have the team flip the base salaries for 2012 ($3.75 million) and 2013 ($6.25 million). Given that two years remain on the deal, Briggs doesn’t appear to have much leverage in this situation and the Bears won’t be inclined to succumb to the linebacker’s demands. Briggs has said that he’d like to be traded if the Bears can’t accommodate his request. But he’s made such statements in the past, and ultimately returned to the team. Before the start of last season, there were rumblings about a potential trade between the Bears and New York Giants involving Briggs and defensive end Osi Umenyiora. But former general manager Jerry Angelo told ESPNChicago.com at the time that while logical given the needs of both teams, those rumors were untrue.

Nick Roach: Signed a two-year contract worth approximately $4 million prior to training camp in 2011, and will receive $1.715 million in base salary for 2012. Roach started 15 games at strong side linebacker last season, and contributed 61 tackles to go with three pass breakups. Interestingly, there were rumblings the Bears were considering bringing in players such as Pisa Tinoisamoa and Lofa Tatupu last season to man Roach’s spot. Tinoisamoa’s health remains an issue, but there’s a chance the team could still be eyeing Tatupu, who reportedly visited the New Orleans Saints on Monday.

Dom DeCicco: An undrafted free agent, DeCicco played in all 16 games as a rookie and tied for second on the team in special teams tackles (17). He is No. 2 on the depth chart at middle linebacker behind Urlacher. It’s still too early to tell whether DeCicco might be Urlacher’s future replacement at the position. He needs a full offseason to improve strength while learning all the nuances of the team’s system.

J.T. Thomas: A sixth-round pick in 2011, Thomas received essentially a red-shirt season when the Bears placed him on the injured reserve on Sept. 3 because of a back injury. Sources said the team was somewhat unpleased with Thomas’ physicality, and wanted him to improve in that area. Thomas further muddled his situation early Monday when he was arrested and charged with misdemeanor marijuana possession.

Patrick Trahan: Signed to the active roster on Nov. 29, Trahan played five games and contributed five tackles on special teams. Prior to joining the Bears for training camp, Trahan spent 2010 on the practice squad of the Tennessee Titans. Trahan possesses the traits of the run-and-hit linebacker the Bears covet, but needs more seasoning to become a legitimate threat to crack the lineup.

Jabara Williams: Claimed off waivers from the St. Louis Rams on Oct. 17, and played five games for the Bears, making five stops on special teams. The Rams drafted Williams in the seventh round, and he played two games with the club before his release. Also fits the run-and-hit mold.

Bears free agents: None

POTENTIAL FREE AGENT TARGETS

MLB/OLB David Hawthorne, Seattle Seahawks, unrestricted

OLB Leroy Hill, Seattle Seahawks, unrestricted

OLB Manny Lawson, Cincinnati Bengals, unrestricted

WHY HAWTHORNE FITS

All three of the potential candidates listed could play SAM linebacker if the team thinks it needs an upgrade at Roach’s spot. But of the three, Hawthorne possesses the most versatility and upside. A four-year veteran, Hawthorne notched 115 tackles in 2011 to go with two sacks and three interceptions, one of which he returned 77 yards for a touchdown (with a Grade II MCL sprain). Bears coach Lovie Smith, a native of East Texas, is no doubt familiar with Hawthorne, who grew up with former safety Danieal Manning in Corsicana, Texas.

Nicknamed “Heater”, Hawthorne has posted more than 100 tackles and led the team in tackles each of the last three seasons. What’s more is he’s played all three linebacker spots. Coincidentally, Hawthorne’s first NFL start came against the Bears in 2009, and he posted 16 tackles in that contest.

Normally a middle linebacker, Hawthorne has also led the Seahawks in tackles from the weak side. In Chicago, Hawthorne, 26, could potentially play Roach’s spot where he’d be an upgrade against the run and in pass coverage, and simultaneously serve as the heir apparent to either Briggs on the weak side or Urlacher in the middle.

Under the last personnel regime, the Bears expressed some interest in Hawthorne. But it’s unclear now how Emery views him.