Share This Page

Pitt will not allow running back Shell to return

| Monday, June 24, 2013, 4:21 p.m.
Pitt running back Rushel Shell, shown in action here against Virginia Tech on Sept. 15, 2012, won't be permitted by Panthers officials to return to the university.

Pitt coach Paul Chryst did not spend much time — if any — deliberating over running back Rushel Shell's desire to return to the Panthers football team.

The answer is no.

Less than a day after it was revealed that Shell had reached out to Pitt officials about a possible return, a source close to the situation said the former Hopewell running back won't be welcomed back to the program.

Chryst had no comment Monday, but his decisive action in resolving the Shell question indicates that he is serious about cleaning up a program that has been plagued by instability the past two seasons. When Shell said three months ago he was transferring, Pitt made purposeful plans to move on without him.

Shell's change of heart won't alter those plans.

Shell, who was No. 1 on Pitt's running back depth chart earlier this year, walked away from the program two weeks into spring drills after a series of disagreements with the coaching staff.

Chryst allowed Shell to take a leave from the team while he considered his future, but he never returned — even while Pitt held nine additional practice sessions.

At the time, Shell said he wanted to transfer to UCLA where he would have been forced to sit out one season, according to NCAA rules.

Pitt officials blocked Shell from transferring to Arizona and Arizona State because of the presence of former Panthers coaches at those universities.

He also was banned from going to an ACC school where he could have competed against his former team.

Shell settled on UCLA, but he changed his mind in the ensuing weeks and wanted to remain close to his 16-month-old twin daughters, Arionna and Amiyah, according to a story Sunday in the Los Angeles Times. Neither UCLA officials nor coach Jim Mora Jr. commented on Shell's desire to attend school there, and he never enrolled.

Shell, who set a Pennsylvania high school record with 9,078 rushing yards at Hopewell from 2008-2011, played a significant role in the Pitt offense during his freshman season in 2012 and appeared to have a promising future.

He rushed for 641 yards and four touchdowns as the top backup to senior Ray Graham. Also, he had started to overcome the challenges of pass-blocking that surfaced early in camp, and he appeared poised to become the total running back Chryst seeks for his ground game.

His collegiate career didn't start well, but he recovered quickly.

Shell was suspended for the opener against Youngstown State for violation of team rules, but he came back and rushed for 157 yards on 28 carries against Virginia Tech in the third week of the season.

That was his best game of the 12 he played, but he also gained 96 yards against Louisville and 79 in the BBVA Compass Bowl against Ole Miss — his first and only collegiate start when Graham was injured.

Pitt will enter training camp in six weeks with four scholarship running backs — junior Isaac Bennett, redshirt sophomore Malcolm Crockett, incoming freshman James Conner and former walk-on Desmond Brown, a senior who was awarded a scholarship after Shell's departure.

Bennett, who started two games as a freshman but was phased out of the offense by Shell last year, is expected to enter camp No. 1 on the depth chart.

Shell's next move is unclear. He did not return telephone calls to the Tribune-Review.

Jerry DiPaola is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at jdipaola@tribweb.com or via Twitter @JDiPaola_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.