[Goose]

The idea that Muir came up with this idea is absurd. He's carrying out his orders. And he'll be a convenient scapegoat.

I am not sure why you feel that way. I think it probable this approach was originated by Muir and his accounting staff. He had a budget problem and needed a solution that would cause the least disruption. Cutting across the board would impact football, and that would probably be politically a no go from the start. Getting rid of "small" sports seemed like the least objectionable way ahead, with the added benefit it didn't raise too many title IX problems. Undoubtedly some push-back was expected, but probably not as much as actually happened.
It is my impression that most "service" or non-academic programs, (such as facilities, the housing office, public safety, and athletics) have always been and continue to be mostly independent fiefdoms. The "administration" only pays attention to them when their are big problems that can't be ignored. As a result, these departments tend to grow unchecked, spend all the money they can get, and do things that may not make sense to anyone but themselves. They get "general directives" from the "central government" that they can usually morph into what they consider in their own interest. Over a period of years one of these groups goes too far off the rails and gets temporarily scrutinized and excoriated. Then the status quo ante is restored and the cycle begins again.

[Goose]

The idea that Muir came up with this idea is absurd. He's carrying out his orders. And he'll be a convenient scapegoat.

I am not sure why you feel that way. I think it probable this approach was originated by Muir and his accounting staff. He had a budget problem and needed a solution that would cause the least disruption. Cutting across the board would impact football, and that would probably be politically a no go from the start. Getting rid of "small" sports seemed like the least objectionable way ahead, with the added benefit it didn't raise too many title IX problems. Undoubtedly some push-back was expected, but probably not as much as actually happened.
It is my impression that most "service" or non-academic programs, (such as facilities, the housing office, public safety, and athletics) have always been and continue to be mostly independent fiefdoms. The "administration" only pays attention to them when their are big problems that can't be ignored. As a result, these departments tend to grow unchecked, spend all the money they can get, and do things that may not make sense to anyone but themselves. They get "general directives" from the "central government" that they can usually morph into what they consider in their own interest. Over a period of years one of these groups goes too far off the rails and gets temporarily scrutinized and excoriated. Then the status quo ante is restored and the cycle begins again.