Measures that reduce sloppy practice and errors aren't a bad thing, Atul Gwande in The Checklist Manifesto put it more eloquently, but basically the reason why some Physicians feel "insulted" by these initiatives is that it violates their "freedom" to practice crappy medicine, not because it impairs their ability to provide quality treatment, since it doesn't.
These measures are actually extremely flexible, you can give just about any reason you want as to why you aren't following the recommendations and still be compliant. Just because your GI bleeder has a Hgb of 4 which then makes them tachycardic, tachypneic, hypotensive, elevates their lactic acid level, etc in no way means that you should give them 3 liters of NS, and any physician who is evaluating the patient correctly won't order that fluid.
The OP is correct that there once was a time when we under-assessed septic patients and just sent them home with a z-pack, which resulted in too many preventable deaths, which is why there's been a push to do a better job of treating these patients. There is certainly an argument that it's possible to over-screen and over treat based on unreliable or non-specific assessment, but I think the best route is to fix those instances when we're doing too much, rather than to just settle for doing too little.