Debate: Who is to blame for the Favre-Childress fiasco?

There is a storm brewing over Minnesota, one that could tear apart a season that, up until two weeks ago, had been magical for the Vikings. At the center of the storm is head coach Brad Childress and quarterback Brett Favre, dance partners that are out of step. Both want to lead and neither wants to acquiesce.

On Monday night, the storm appeared to strengthen, as the Vikings lost to Chicago, despite a valient comeback attempt led by Favre. It was the second straight loss for Minnesota since Childress thought about benching Favre and was seen on the sidelines arguing with his quarterback. Overall, Minnesota has lost three of four since starting 10-1, and are in jeopardy of losing a first-round bye.

So who is to blame for the mess? A coach that wants total control of his offense, or a three-time MVP quarterback who thinks he's earned the right to call his own plays? We put the question to NFL Network's Jason La Canfora and NFL.com's Steve Wyche, and let them debate.

La Canfora: Don't blame Childress Brian Billick once said, somewhat infamously, that, "Coaches coach, players play, and writers write." It might not be the most profound press-conference sentence ever uttered, but there is some simple brilliance conveyed within it. When it comes to this Brett Favre/Brad Childress fiasco, that chain of command applies. The coach makes the decision on who plays, and for how long, and anything to the contrary undermines the makeup of the team. If Jim Caldwell, who has been a head coach in the NFL for a hot minute, can tell Peyton Manning to take a seat with a slight lead and with an undefeated season and 23 straight regular-season wins on the line, Childress has every authority to yank a 40-year-old Favre from a game for similar, safety-first reasons on a night when the team's tackles are getting whipped and the quarterback is getting tossed around. For all of Favre's accomplishments, he's done them in the ultimate team sport. He may think he knows what's best for the team, but that's not in his job description. Some may say Childress should have known what he was getting himself into when he lured Favre back from another alleged retirement, but that's not the point. Favre agreed to join a team built on running the ball, which he claimed in the summer was one of the main reasons for his return. You can't have it both ways. Yes, even sometimes Favre has to know his role. And, more to the point, know when to pick his spots. Popping off to the media after a game when your team is spiraling isn't going to help anyone associated with the Vikings, though it certainly will get forth any personal agenda Favre might harbor. But that's not leadership. Say what you want about Childress, but he put $12 million in Favre's pocket at a time when no one else was making an offer (and the chance to earn over $20 million in two seasons). That should mean something in terms of short-term loyalty. And, yes, Childress also has to know he can thank Favre, by and large, for the two-year extension he received in November. Sadly for Vikings fans, the bizarre dynamics and unusual nature of this entire courtship might ultimately undermine their season.		Wyche: Don't blame Favre Jason is absolutely right about insubordination being intolerable at all levels. Not acceptable. No excuses. Ever. That's why, if Vikings coach Brad Childress, whom I respect, wanted to show his team who's really running the show, he would have fined, benched, suspended -- in some way disciplined -- Brett Favre when the quarterback didn't come out of the game when it was suggested by the coach in a game against Carolina two weeks -- and two losses -- ago. And if not for that, then for Favre's public airing of the dispute that should have been a private discussion between him and Childress. Instead, things went on as they have ever since Childress picked Favre up at the airport last summer and then turned the keys to the team over to No. 4. Favre started against the Chicago Bears Monday night and rallied the Vikings in the second half playing his type of firebrand football -- something he didn't do in the first half, when the Vikings failed to score and it looked like he had stuck more to a script. And therein lies the tell-tale guts of what's going on in Minnesota. Players are rolling with Favre. They saw what happened Monday night and they've been part of the magic that's transpired all season. They see that Favre is the man dictating things offensively and they are cool with that. They know they might not be where they are -- in position to secure the NFC's No. 2 seed with a game left despite losing three of their last four -- if Favre wasn't the starter. Tarvaris Jackson and Sage Rosenfels might have done things exactly the way Childress wanted, but Minnesota could be on the outside of the playoff circle, looking in. And despite Adrian Peterson's role being somewhat reduced, the offense is far more dangerous than it has been in past years. Sidney Rice, Visanthe Shiancoe, Percy Harvin, Chester Taylor and others have fully benefitted from Favre's arrival -- as have the Vikings as a whole. Was Favre's usurping of Childress' authority right? No, it wasn't. Neither was Childress allowing him to do so. That's two wrongs. You know what that doesn't make.