^ Certainly a change, the size of it being debatable and I felt that was a good bit on the writers part to leave that open for interpretation.

 

It has always been Carol's character to do what she felt was best for the group, morals be damned. She murdered the two infected people at the prison in an attempt to keep the disease from spreading. She murdered Lizzie when she realized that the girl was too unstable to ever be anything but a hinderance to the group. And so on. Carol does what she believes is best for the survival of the group. Shooting the Wolf, from her point of view, was the only sensible action to take.

 

Intro

It really doesn't matter whether or not he changed, with respect to his deserved punishment. As a psychopath and multiple murderer (who already killed many innocents), just like serial killers do in real life, no one of sound mind would want to release them if they hypothetically "changed". Whether a flicker of unprecedented conscience being born in an adult psychopath or an even more unprecedented growth of conscience and extreme remorse, that serial killer/psychopath is still punished for their past murders. Not to mention no one would want to gamble with the word of a personality disordered individual who could be manipulating their "change" or "conscience", even if the public fails to see their secondary gain.

Would you say it's "right" if someone had let Ted Bundy go free (or have someone detain him until he promises to be good), if you learned he saved a boy from drowning? Because that actually happened, and brings me to my main point, and alternative reasoning for the wolf's last act. While yes, the wolf was going to die anyway, versus the less-risky act of saving a drowning boy, the motive for similar-minded psychos is likely to be the same: manipulation. A final act of manipulation, in the wolf's case, by certifying his death in what looks like a selfless act, and appears to gain nothing but suffering. ​But this is just that: an act. There is a huge advantage to do what the wolf did, given how committed he was to his group of other psychopaths. So I will list why the last act of his mosh-pit into walkers - and more importantly, his words mimicking concern for Denise's welfare - was to help them (the other wolves) in the long term.

The Logical "Why?"

*(Keep in mind, the wolf doesn't know if his "storyline" of Wolves is over, so this is looking at it from his point-of-view about what he could do in that moment to help their success in the future)

Why would it most likely be for them, the other wolves?

1. The wolf knows Morgan and Denise are part of the community he and his Wolves have attacked.
2. The wolf has encountered Carol, Rosita, Eugene, and possibly others, seeing him be evil (taking a hostage, hacking bodies)
3. The wolf has consistently and persistently remained steadfast in his dedication to the wolves and their "mission".
4. The wolf, prior to being walker food, at no point shows a glimmer of remorse, second-thought, or possibility of understanding other philosophies. On the contrary, some of his last words to Denise reflect his narcissistic gloating, saying he manipulated himself into getting the IV. Then laughs.
5. Given the above evidence of what we do know for a fact, is that this alleged conscience or "humanity" would've had to happen within minutes or seconds after his creepy, self-serving speeches before death.
6. Change in attitude or psychological re-programming doesn't happen in minutes or seconds, or a week with a crazy pacifist, especially if you're a sociopath.
7. So the likihood of him defying real or ZA-real probabilities of suddenly giving his life for a person he'd happily hack away at - if she weren't a doctor and part of his conversion plan - is not a reasonable conclusion whatsoever. So let's put a pin in that.
8. Isn't it much more simple, given all of the above, that his last effort would be to appear selfless, appear to care about Denise as he dives into walkers, making him look like the poster-child for change, and second chances?
9. Isn't it an efficient way to manipulate the witnesses to his evil acts, causing them to possibly soften up, and lower their guard (Eugene, Rosita, Tara, Morgan, etc) if confronted with other wolves, since one of theirs saved Denise's life because he "cared", hence giving them the upper hand?
10. Yelling words of concern in addition to his dive, so Denise is more vulnerable to believing another wolf (who wants the doctor) can be good as well?
11. To falsely validate support for Morgan (which helps the wolves and hurts the Alexandrian's survival), while weakening support for Carol's logical, swift justice?

All of the above gives the wolves a better chance to infiltrate or at the very least, psychologically mess with the group, as it has successfully persuaded so many viewers on this forum as a genuine sacrifice! So clearly it's effective.

Simple, Secondary Gain

The simplest solution is the best solution in this case, which is this ability he's given to both save her life and look like the good guy who changed, while falsely skewing reality in favor of the wolves. The thought process is rapid for these false martyr type situations, but the inner logic is pretty clear and goes something like this:

"I'm getting eaten anyway, so might as well put on the act of yelling at her to get away and look concerned. The others who saw me take Denise, and the woman who should've killed me, will also feel bad, think I've changed, give that idiot Morgan another chance, and with their guard down from this "sacrifice", maybe my group can pounce on this and have a successful attack next time. And it'll all be thanks to me and this brilliant last con. (inner smile)"

This is further evidenced by his admission to Denise that he'd been "selfish", while alluding to the fact that he should've waited for their attack on Alexandria so it would've worked. Doesn't it then, stand to reason, that if his "selfish" guilt was disrupting the wolves' plan of successful massacre (because of his impatience), that his last act of "selflessness" would be to help them prevail? The answer is yes.

Conclusion

Therefore, much like real-life psycho Ted Bundy, who saved a kid from drowning, there's no other plausible explanation for a similar, fictional psycho who's also depraved and constantly in a state of manipulation, than to use the opportunity to boost their long-term power (and perception) by performing a short-term act of "heroism".

This isn't just an alternative possibility; more like the only possibility that makes perfect sense and completely ideal - from the wolf's perspective - if he's gonna die anyway. Perfect setup for him to psychologically weaken his enemy long after his death, giving his real group a chance to kill em all.

In Short

While a) it doesn't actually matter if he changed, b) he definitely did not change following the logic of his character, and c) used the opportunity to help the wolves, and doing it so cleverly in the process of death.

 

Morgan was right in a way - regarding a wolf's redemption but it was too late and if you wait around, poop happens. I was sad to see Carol take him out though, right after his turning a new leaf lol

 

By that logic you'd be right to randomly drive into pedestrians eventually you'll run down a serial killer.

 

Or he just had a thing for Denise because she was the first woman he has seen who brushes her teeth and didn't try to kill him in the last 2 years.

 

I think that the Wolves as a group are done, but other than that this post clarifies everything to anyone that has an ounce of doubt that any significant change has happened and that Morgan's actions are justified for it.

Even shorter for the shorter attention spans of Morgan apologists:

- Wolf a psycho killer manipulator
- You don't let no psycho killer manipulator run around because it gonna bite you in da azzzzzzzz