I think that I can see both sides of this discussion - and a good discussion it is too! It's time has certainly arrived. However, I suspect that, in most cases anyway, when push comes to shove, the Captain knows that he's going to be held responsible for the outcome - if it is somewhat less than successful.
Now, human nature being what it is, I reckon that most Captains will want to be in control of the aeroplane. Yes, sure, the FO will undoubtedly be well qualified to handle the aircraft but, given crew rostering arrangements - especially in large airlines, there is a very real possibility that the FO will be an "unknown quality" to the Captain.
Will he be likely to entrust the flying to his FO in any sort of emergency? Notbloodylikely... methinks. Like I say, this is human nature. We've been able to modify a certain amount of "human nature" thru CRM and that has had many beneficial effects, when properly implemented.
Perhaps CRM has to take that next step, down this path.
It's a difficult path tho! It deals with the most basic of human instincts... the will to survive! A Captain is probably (emphasis on "probably") the one with the best chance of a successful outcome. The stats are probably a bit jaded, as one poster has already - and quite logically - suggested. How difficult will it be for a Captain to hand over control to the FO in a dire emergency?
I think its worth investigating this concept because there's no real data on the result of such actions, aside from the illustrious Haynes example, already stated. That could well be the model on which a CRM course can be built, but the command psychology needs to be addressed at the same time, for the benefit of all us lesser mortals who still reckon we're bullet-proof... or something!