The Clarks vs Camp Dinner Bell: Comparing FTWD and TWD

[Nashville]

3 hours ago, SimoneS said:

It was only a matter of time that Hershel's exposed farm and its cattle would have attracted a herd of walkers. 

That's an unknowable which can't be stated as fact.  The Farm may have collapsed within a month, or it may have stood for years.

What we do know is this: the Farm was set off the main road, with well-tended fences, and house and livestock out of line of sight.  Herschel and family rarely ventured off the farm, except for occasional foraging runs to the nearby community.  By all indications their pre-CDB existence was a quiet life; the Farm's walker encounters were pretty much restricted to the odd shambler wandering through the woods and coming across the property line.  All of which means through happenstance or design, the Greenes had already stumbled across one of the ZA's golden rules: walkers only attack in response to stimuli (audial or visual), so don't stimulate the walkers to attack.  

A horde of walkers, like any aimless crowd, behaves much like a fluid - unless specifically redirected (by stimuli, in the walkers' case), they tend to follow the path of least resistance.  Do they have the ability to push down Herschel's fences and run roughshod over the Farm?  Sure, if they see or hear something on the far side of the fence which provokes them.  Otherwise a walker horde running up against a fence may start to pile up - but lacking stimulus to do otherwise, the mass will eventually redirect to avoid the resistance and keep flowing on down the open road.  

Unfortunately for the Farm, stimulus was provided to provoke the walkers to stray from their path of least resistance - in the form of Rick and Shane's mano-a-mano in the field, and Carl's application of a 9mm Final Solution to the Shane problem.  All of which transpired to generate a wealth of stimulus sufficient to provoke the walker herd to leave the road, overrun the fence, and overtake the Farm.  

Did they mean to?  Of course not.  Did they regret it?  Most assuredly.  But - did they do it?  Oh, hell yeah.

And that's one example.

 

3 hours ago, SimoneS said:

As for your Woodbury claim, I don't even begin to understand that one. Woodbury was ruled by a crazy man and would have been destroyed either by him or the walkers. It was a fool's paradise at best.

Quite possibly; nevertheless, it did maintain an existence - at least until CDB showed up.  :)

 

Quote

Terminus as a safe place is so out there, I don't know what say about that one.

Terminus was safe - for the Termites.  At least, until CDB showed up.  :)

 

Quote

I will never understand the rational in twisting these events to make them Rick and his people's fault, maybe it is the fan perspective of knowing and everything. They aren't perfect and have made mistakes, but they live in a dangerous world and are not responsible for the destruction occurs around them.

I'm not saying it's "their fault" in the sense either group set out with malicious intent to destroy a settlement (with the possible exception of Woodbury, for which I don't blame them one bit), nor am I saying either CDB or the Clarks directly caused the demise of the various settlements.  What I am saying is, our groups have a definite tendency to set in motion - either directly or indirectly - the events which lead to the demise of previously relatively stable settlements.  CDB and the Clarks are not simple observers, separated from the post-ZA landscape and unsullied by actual contact; they are active participants - and that participation consists of actions, which lead to reactions.  

This was put forth as a comparison between the two camps, not as an exercise in blame assignment; sorry if you took it as such.  My intent was more humorous than anything else - although it appears THAT intent was held down screaming until a stake was driven through its fucking heart.

[raven]

4 hours ago, Nashville said:

This was put forth as a comparison between the two camps, not as an exercise in blame assignment; sorry if you took it as such.  My intent was more humorous than anything else - although it appears THAT intent was held down screaming until a stake was driven through its fucking heart.

"You people are a plague" - Hershel :D

Humor aside, it does get kind of old that the showpeople tend to recycle these themes.  WRT to Woodbury, Merle kidnapped Glenn and Maggie when they were trying to find baby supplies of all things, which set everything in motion.   Phillip could have defused things by releasing them but chose threats and torture; after rescuing them, Rick tried to make peace but was rebuffed.  The show could have chosen to set a dynamic in motion of two camps coexisting uneasily side by side but decided to blow things up instead (yeah I know, comic storyline, yada yada).  Of course at Terminus the choice was die and be eaten or run and destroy - pretty easy choice, but another variation on the theme.  Rinse, repeat on FTWD now.

I like zombie shows and some of the characters on each show BUT each could be improved by adding humor (we do get some humor on FTWD) and some more realistic behavior from people.   I actually don't blame the Clark family for any of the so-called destruction in their wake; it's just the show not finding a different way to get them from place to place, and I could nitpick each situation.  The Clarks (or maybe Travis) actually saved people (the ones in the cages back in S1) when Strand would have left them to die.

[SimoneS]

19 minutes ago, raven said:

I actually don't blame the Clark family for any of the so-called destruction in their wake; it's just the show not finding a different way to get them from place to place, and I could nitpick each situation.  The Clarks (or maybe Travis) actually saved people (the ones in the cages back in S1) when Strand would have left them to die.

I don't blame Rick & crew or the Clarks for the destruction that occurs around them. Like with Hershel, an exposed indefensible farm is always going to be doomed whether it is a herd or humans attacking. FTWD could have avoided this similarity to the TWD if it had stuck to its original premise and not jump so quickly into the dystopian aftermath.

Edited October 4, 2017 by SimoneS

[raven]

3 minutes ago, SimoneS said:

FTWD could have avoided this similarity to the TWD if it had stuck to its original premise and not jump so quickly into the dystopian aftermath.

Yes this was disappointing.  With the last set of episodes, it would have been more interesting for me to have Alicia actually get a win and save most of the people, or have them work together to survive.  This could have set up a your way vs my way between her and Madison.   The show barely touches on the theme of when is force necessary, and when it does, it comes down squarely on "yes it is!" - with Lola's wish for nonviolence being shown as wrong being the most recent example.  So we end up with our main characters being the "cause" of death and destruction, because in both shows, there is no other way to survive.  TBH, if TWD hadn't gotten Rick and Michonne together, I might not be watching.  They are pushing me with the stupid junkyard people however.

On FTWD, I'm still interested in Alicia, Nick, Strand, Daniel, Taqa and Ofelia.   I get the argument about separating main characters and the machinations to get them there were goofy, but Alicia, Nick and Troy out in the wind could have potential.  I'm prepared to be disappointed though.

[Nashville]

3 hours ago, icemiser69 said:

It would seem to me that not all walkers would have the same eating/feeding habits.

Perhaps a few would just want to nibble on a person/animal a little bit (graze) and move on its merry way.  Perhaps others might like a few leafy greens to balance out their diet.

Why would all walker behavior be predictable, when their former human selves are unpredictable?

A tofu eating human, becomes a meat eating walker?

Well... if we're going to anthropomorphize walkers, let's do it all the way and remember Tommy Lee Jones' words in MIB: "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it."  :)  The common rule of mob psychology is that individual flashes of clarity are submerged in the instinctive mass-mind of the crowd, which operates at its lowest common denominator; pockets of individuality may occasionally erupt, but are just as quickly swept away.

I expect given their impaired cognitive abilities, walkers could reasonably be expected to operate at an even more elemental level than thinking men.  Walkers instinctively respond to stimulus indicating a potential food source, which would directly contribute to the horde concept; even if not individually stimulated, a walker seeing other walkers moving in a particular direction would likely interpret their motion as an indication they were stimulated by something, and follow them to get in on the coming smorgasbord.  Which direction the horde heads would be dependent upon one of two factors: one directed - a common stimulus drawing their attention to a particular point - and one undirected - a random critical mass-sized collection of walkers wandering in the same general direction long enough to stimulate others to follow.  On the first, they'll follow the stimulus generator; on the second, they'll just continue in the same initial direction until alternate stimuli or geography encourages a redirection.

Granted no empirical evidence exists to support any of this; it's all my own internal musings.  This concept was anecdotally validated, however, in CDB's plan to redirect the quarry herd around Alexandria; CDB's plan was working, right up until the noise from the Wolf attack provided sufficient stimuli to divert the herd.

 

Quote

Why can't walkers mutate?

Mutation is a demonstration of active growth and evolution.  Walkers don't grow; they decay and devolve.  :)

[slf]

12 hours ago, Nashville said:

That's an unknowable which can't be stated as fact.  The Farm may have collapsed within a month, or it may have stood for years.

What we do know is this: the Farm was set off the main road, with well-tended fences, and house and livestock out of line of sight.  Herschel and family rarely ventured off the farm, except for occasional foraging runs to the nearby community.  By all indications their pre-CDB existence was a quiet life; the Farm's walker encounters were pretty much restricted to the odd shambler wandering through the woods and coming across the property line.  All of which means through happenstance or design, the Greenes had already stumbled across one of the ZA's golden rules: walkers only attack in response to stimuli (audial or visual), so don't stimulate the walkers to attack.  

A horde of walkers, like any aimless crowd, behaves much like a fluid - unless specifically redirected (by stimuli, in the walkers' case), they tend to follow the path of least resistance.  Do they have the ability to push down Herschel's fences and run roughshod over the Farm?  Sure, if they see or hear something on the far side of the fence which provokes them.  Otherwise a walker horde running up against a fence may start to pile up - but lacking stimulus to do otherwise, the mass will eventually redirect to avoid the resistance and keep flowing on down the open road.  

Unfortunately for the Farm, stimulus was provided to provoke the walkers to stray from their path of least resistance - in the form of Rick and Shane's mano-a-mano in the field, and Carl's application of a 9mm Final Solution to the Shane problem.  All of which transpired to generate a wealth of stimulus sufficient to provoke the walker herd to leave the road, overrun the fence, and overtake the Farm.  

4

The thing about that farm was that if you're standing facing away from it then to your left is a river. That's where Rick and Hershel caught a walker and where Daryl found Sophia's doll. The occasional walker who made it that far tended to get stuck or washed away. To the right of the farm was the barn o' walkers which might have been doing for the farm what Michonne's walkers-on-leashes were doing for her, if to a lesser degree. The cattle and crops were to the back of the house and maybe a bit on the left? If you go to the back of the property far enough there's a drop, like the house sat near a cliff or something. Not to mention the million and one fences out front. The house wasn't an impenetrable fortress, obviously, but I thought it was pretty well-situated. 

[Nashville]

Now these are the discussions I can get my teeth into.   I miss them some, primarily because so much has already been talked to death over the past seven years or so.  :)

 

5 hours ago, icemiser69 said:

So what humans were before they turn has no affect on what happens after they turn? I was expecting/hoping at some point that one or two people might become immune to turning, or react differently after they turn. 

Right now, we are stuck with Rick's group and Madison's group doing stupid shit resulting in innocent people getting killed.  Rinse, wash, repeat.  No new elements added to the show. 

The walkers are what the walkers are.  I was hoping that walkers on both shows would be more of a threat over time.  That they would start doing something unexpected.  On this past episode of Fear, it was poor decision making that got all of these people killed, moreso than anything else.

The sort of change for which you're looking would definitely be interesting if the current walker mythos allowed for it, but alas - the "zombie model" established by Kirkland and expanded upon by the shows' writers and SFX teams does not appear to.  Aside from the ZV virus(?) itself the only evolutionary change we've seen to date which may be walker-associated was not on the part of the walkers, but of the natural world's response to their existence: TWD's pandemic disease which swept through the Prison (nearly killing Glenn), and caused the bleeding-eye walker phenomenon.  And even this is suspect; we don't know if the (bacteria?  virus?) associated with the disease originated with walkers and jumped to humans, or the other way around.  Personally I'd suspect the former over the latter simply because the (quite literally) filthy walkers would furnish an outstandingly rich foundation for microbial growth - and therefore mutation - but that's pure supposition on my part.

 

5 hours ago, icemiser69 said:

On the mothership, walkers are no longer a real threat at all, the series can't head in any real new direction unless they start killing off the main cast and replacing them with people of a different personality type.    I think there needs to be some sort of non-human threat.

I have a horrible memory, how anyone can remember everything that has happened on the mothership and this series is both amazing and disturbing to me.  Disturbing in the sense that my memory has always been that bad.  Having said that, at one point in time on the mothership, weren't walkers attracted to heat?  Wasn't there a huge fire that all of the walkers walked into?

If that is indeed true, then that would mean that walkers are also attracted to heat.  Unless the assumption is, because a fire makes noise, that walkers were attracted to noise.  Regardless, even if they were attracted to the noise of a fire, isn't a fire something that could be used to eliminate walkers with zero risk to humans, assuming the fire doesn't get out of control?

Walkers appear to respond to all the same sensory stimuli humans do, just in a more limited fashion - hardly surprising, given that (a) their original chassis is human, and (b) their sensory receptor nerves are dying along with everything else.  In descending order of sensitivity, walkers have been noted to respond to:

1. Sound.  Walkers will react to loud noises over great distances.
2. Sight.  Second to sound only because of the line-of-site limitation.  IMHO this actually provokes the most violent response in walkers.  Bright lights will draw them (witness the infected's reaction to Madison's INCREDIBLY BONE-STICK STUPID strobing of the Hotel's rooftop sign), and any perception of motion other than their own patented walker shuffle rings the dinner bell hard.
3. Smell.  Not near as sensitive as the first two, but still a factor.  Demonstrated by the fact the the coating-oneself-with-zombie-guts trick actually works.  This actually appears to be more of a reaction defuser than a reaction stimulus; initial walker responses to sound or sight stimuli are dampened and/or eliminated if the stimuli generator looks AND smells like one of their own.
4. Touch.  Doesn't appear to be much going on there, which isn't surprising for a couple of reasons.  Firstly - the outer skin which hosts the touch receptor nerve endings is the part of a walker most exposed to the vagaries of the walker's environment and the elements, so it naturally demonstrate the most immediate and drastic decay (and keeps the makeup people drawing a steady paycheck).  Secondly - walkers in a pack are constantly bumping into each other or obstacles all the time anyway, so reaction to any such stimuli would undoubtedly have to overcome significant sensory fatigue to even register.
5. Taste.  If this is an issue, then it's already too late for you to worry about it.  ;)

In truth, I believe sight and sound account for the walkers' fascination with fire more than any perception of heat; the light of the fire PLUS the perceived motion of the flickering flames PLUS the crackling and roaring sounds of the flames create a sensory triple whammy.

 

Quote

Also, if it is all about noise, I would think that any of these people would be smart enough to either make or go to a store and find a bunch of wind chimes and place them in a way to divert walkers away from where people live.  Or better yet, hang them on a branch at the edge of cliff and let walkers fall off one by one.

Not a bad idea, but one probably limited solely by the fact most wind chimes don't really make sufficient noise to project over long distance - especially to rotting ears.  :)  

[Nashville]

8 hours ago, icemiser69 said:

What is the starting timeline within the shows for both series?

 

How much earlier did Fear start, before the mothership?

 

Just wondering if anyone happens to know.

Not sure if I'm correctly understanding what you're asking, but...

• Both shows share the same timeline, where the global outbreak occurred at some (deliberately unspecified by Kirkland) date in/around August 2010 - commonly referred to as Day 0.
• Nick woke up in the church to his girlfriend's newly-acquired appetites on Day 1.
• Rick emerged from his coma to find himself alone in a deserted hospital on Day 59.

Is this what you were looking for?

[BasilSeal]

On 04 October 2017 at 1:30 AM, SimoneS said:

Yeah, I don't agree. You are making an overgeneralization to excuse bad storytelling, IMO. Speaking for myself, I am not hostile towards FTWD. Rather I am beyond disappointed that the show is not what they said it was going to be about; the beginning of the Zombie Apocalypse and the disintegration of society. If they had delivered what the show they promised us, then there would be fewer comparisons to TWD. Instead the show jumped from riots in LA to a suburb to a boat to the desert in Mexico. Seriously, WTF? They should still be stuck in LA, struggling get out along with the millions of people who live there. At least, then it would make sense for people to be fighting over supplies, food, and water.

Your key objection here appears to be that they didn't make exactly the show you wanted, which is fair enough, but just because the show isn't what you personally wanted it to be, doesn't mean it's a bad show.

 

FTWD isn't perfect by any means, you could quite reasonably point out many flaws in the writing and themes, but the same flaws and more are there in spades in the original show. this forum appears full of people slagging the show off, whilst failing to give any substantive reasoning as to why it's awful beyond 'it's not as good as TWD'. there's a two word answer to this argument and those words are "Herschel's Farm". You couldn't pay me enough to sit through that season again.

[SimoneS]

8 hours ago, BasilSeal said:

Your key objection here appears to be that they didn't make exactly the show you wanted, which is fair enough, but just because the show isn't what you personally wanted it to be, doesn't mean it's a bad show.

 

FTWD isn't perfect by any means, you could quite reasonably point out many flaws in the writing and themes, but the same flaws and more are there in spades in the original show. this forum appears full of people slagging the show off, whilst failing to give any substantive reasoning as to why it's awful beyond 'it's not as good as TWD'. there's a two word answer to this argument and those words are "Herschel's Farm". You couldn't pay me enough to sit through that season again.

Nope, that wasn't what I wrote. As for the criticism of FTWD on this forum, people give reasons, but don't feel the need to for each comment. If you love this dreck, that should be enough.

Edited November 3, 2017 by SimoneS

[nodorothyparker]

Bumping as a general reminder that this thread exists for specific comparing and contrasting across the WD universe.

[OoohMaggie]

14 hours ago, DrNowsWeightScale said:

You know on the original show, Michonne chopped off the bottom jaws and arms of a couple of walkers?

 

That was one of the big mistakes the show made, which is why you’ve never seen it used in the show again. The initial idea was that if you chopped off the arms and lower jaw of a walker, it had no desire to attack you and could literally be used as a pack mule. The other benefit was that if you had a couple of said walker’s in close proximity to you, no other walker with arms and jaw would attack you, which had they kept on with it, would basically have killed any danger element from the show. All those tense, surrounded by walkers scenes would have been made ridiculous because there was such an easy way out.

 The ‘cover yourself in walker blood’ technique was, in my opinion, another mistake, ‘The Walking Dead’ are supposed to be a threat, but what threat can they be when such a simple escape method is so easily obtained?

Think back to the Saviours being ‘trapped’ in Sanctuary, why didn’t they just do what Gabriel and Negan did and pull in a couple of walkers, grab a handful of guts and just walk out to freedom when it got dark? The show made a rod for its own back when they came up with these silly ideas.

[DrNowsWeightScale]

On 9/5/2018 at 2:06 PM, OoohMaggie said:

 The ‘cover yourself in walker blood’ technique was, in my opinion, another mistake, ‘The Walking Dead’ are supposed to be a threat, but what threat can they be when such a simple escape method is so easily obtained?

Think back to the Saviours being ‘trapped’ in Sanctuary, why didn’t they just do what Gabriel and Negan did and pull in a couple of walkers, grab a handful of guts and just walk out to freedom when it got dark? The show made a rod for its own back when they came up with these silly ideas.

I think they later said on the original show that being exposed to Zombie guts could cause sickness.

The pastor guy (Gabriel?) on TWD was blind for a few episodes because he had been covered in or sprayed by guts. But this is about what, three or so years into the zombie apocalypse?

Why does it take X years into the ZA to notice that being exposed to guts causes sickness, I wonder?

Shouldn't folks have noticed this sooner? Or assumed that covering yourself in guts could cause illness?

On FTWD, Nick had covered himself in zombie blood and guts a few times.

As to the zombies being easily beaten, it doesn't even take covering one's self in guts.

In TWD, after Carl is wounded, Rick is so emotionally compromised by that, he goes out, all by himself, into the zombie filled Alexandria and starts to single handedly kill the zombies off (then he's joined by about four of his friends).

They all manage to kill off hundreds of zombies by themselves, all in one night.

That to me made the zombies seem a little less menacing, and compare to season 1 or 2, when the group hid under cars as a zombie herd went down the high way. (Similar scene later, but with Daryl and Beth hiding in a trunk of a car).

I've so far not seen this sort of thing addressed too much on FTWD.

I think these shows sometimes veer towards wanting us to perceive other humans as being the real threat, not so much the zombies. Which kind of bugs me, because I've loved the zombie genre going back to childhood, and I find zombies creepy.

But both shows sometimes make zombies out to be a bland thing, or no more dangerous than a paper cut.

Or, the shows waffle back and forth on this. You'll have eps on both shows where zombies are treated nonchalantly by the characters on one episode or two, only for the show to remind us next episode that zombies are dangerous and not to be messed with, and so they show a character who is careless around a zombie and gets killed as a result.

It's like both shows cannot make up their minds on how deadly and dangerous zombies are supposed to be, or what the "rules" are to safely evading zombies.

Edited September 11, 2018 by DrNowsWeightScale

[DrNowsWeightScale]

On 9/5/2018 at 5:31 PM, seacliffsal said:

I just loved the irony of Al getting all upset that someone stole "her" van while she and June were riding around in a truck/car they just took.

I wonder what the true concept of ownership is in these shows.  They move into homes that belonged to others, take goods from stores (and other places), and take a car whenever they find/need one.  So, why is the van Al's, but nothing else belongs to anyone?  Oh well.

That is interesting to think about.

There was the episode where John takes June to that general store and tells her to take whatever she wants.

He goes to grab a video, and she takes some candy and stuff. And he was a cop prior to the ZA.

On TWD, you had the early episode where Andrea saw a mermaid necklace in the department store, says "this would be nice for my sister" and Rick (in his cop uniform) tells her to go ahead and take it.

She hesitates because it feels like stealing, and he's a cop standing right there.

There was also an episode where Lori or Carol or someone was pilfering through abandoned cars for food and remarked they felt bad or wrong for doing it, because it felt like stealing. 

On FTWD, the wheel chair guy and blond lady in a ball cap feel if you cannot protect and defend your property, it's up for grabs.

That's how they rationalized taking "Polar Bear's" truck from him. They think if you are too inept, lazy, or stupid to defend your own truck, you deserve to have it stolen; it's "your fault."

I thought that was some shoddy rationalization and poor morality right there. Infants cannot defend themselves from adults - that doesn't mean you steal their lollipop from them, LOL.

Edited September 11, 2018 by DrNowsWeightScale

[OoohMaggie]

In response to your post above,

The only reason Gabriel got sick and lost an eye, was because the show needed (way too late) a valid reason for people not to use the Walker blood escape plan. An escape plan that could be used every single time anyone got trapped by any number of Walkers, therefore rendering the Walker threat null and void.

As you say, how many times did Nick use it? When people then got into a dangerous situation and didn’t use that method to escape, everyone watching is thinking why don’t you use it dumbass, as I said it was a big mistake for the show to come up with that idea.

The simple fact is that an able bodied person, with average levels of mobility, should by this time in a ZA find the Walkers no more than a minor irritation. They shouldn’t be putting themselves in close proximity to any Walker, they shouldn’t be killing them with a six inch knife, they should use a staff like Morgan or any mid range weapon. Stupid instances, although done for an obvious reason, like Coral getting bitten should never happen.

Even as big fans of the Zombie world, we have to admit if we’re honest that in the two shows they just aren’t, or shouldn’t be scary, intimidating or dangerous any more, even in large numbers. This is why the show has to contrive events where our people face danger from the Walkers, healthy, intelligent people putting themselves in stupid, unbelievable situations, just to try and ramp up the tension and excitement. Sometimes it feels right, most of the time it's a question of  ‘Oh Please!’

This is the reason humans have taken over the role of the ‘threat’ to our people, because in reality they are the only threat. This is why we have to endure ever increasingly weird villains, as the show tries to vary things up and stop us getting totally bored. This surely will be the cause of the show ending, Walkers not being any danger whatsoever and not being able to think up any more different types of bad guys. The show has had a great run but there is a limit to what you can create out of any given genre, what more can they do with a show based upon ‘The Walking Dead’?

Edited September 12, 2018 by OoohMaggie

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

On 10/10/2017 at 4:20 PM, Nashville said:

Not sure if I'm correctly understanding what you're asking, but...

• Both shows share the same timeline, where the global outbreak occurred at some (deliberately unspecified by Kirkland) date in/around August 2010 - commonly referred to as Day 0.
• Nick woke up in the church to his girlfriend's newly-acquired appetites on Day 1.
• Rick emerged from his coma to find himself alone in a deserted hospital on Day 59.

Is this what you were looking for?

Not @icemiser69, but that's part of what I came here to ask.  (because I'm a very lazy dummy who won't spend a couple minutes trying to look it up)....

At what point in the FTWD series [which season & episode] do they reach Day 59, IE the day Rick woke up from his coma?

The knowledge isn't vital to survival or anything, but its a nagging brain-worm.  One of those random things that pop up in your mind and causes a weird extreme desire to know at the moment it occurs.

[iRarelyWatchTV36]

36 minutes ago, iRarelyWatchTV36 said:

Not @icemiser69, but that's part of what I came here to ask.  (because I'm a very lazy dummy who won't spend a couple minutes trying to look it up)....

At what point in the FTWD series [which season & episode] do they reach Day 59, IE the day Rick woke up from his coma?

The knowledge isn't vital to survival or anything, but its a nagging brain-worm.  One of those random things that pop up in your mind and causes a weird extreme desire to know at the moment it occurs.

For those wondering the same as me - and didn't already know - there's a TWD fandom wiki that provides what seems to be a pretty accurate timeline of events [have only seen S1E1-4 and S4E1, personally].  The provided link just covers the FTWD events, but I'm sure there's one dedicated to TWD as well.

Fear The Walking Dead Timeline

Oh, and,

Spoiler

Day 59 [Rick's coma awakening] in FTWD occurs in the beginning eps of the 2nd half of S3.