Looks like an honest mistake by DEE to bid on resources rather than an auction player.

Why the game engine didn't void the player lot number 5 bid for having no name is a mystery.
But that is not DEE's fault.

Moreso because ELG bid on same lot 5 was voided. 
So game rules ought be applied and DEE bid also made void on lot 5.  

With Eduard's aggreement first though, player 5 ought go to next highest bidder CB.

Completely correct. 
I contacted Mark yesterday already and he offered to process lot #5 in CB's favour, especially since there are no dependencies in the bids below.
The reason why DEE's blank order was processed could not be determined.

Of course, this assumes that Craig/CB is still interested.
If not, I'll accept the trade as it is and just rename the player.

Hi William,

There's "good" news and bad news.
The bad news is that: EDI got an annoyingly low number of shots. As you correctly calculated, the expected shots were about 11–5.5 in EDI's favour.
BUT the "good" news is that: EDI's loss was still somewhat correct. 
The expected result was about 1.8–2.0, with the expected points at around 1.2–1.8 in NAI's favour - due to the GKs, shooters and offside.
So it's been certainly annoying, but not too unlucky.

The number of shots is by far the most random variable in the game engine, given it's calculated 90 times per match with a low probability each. Reducing the volatily would be rather easy, but it would take some major code changes.

So the only way to adjust is to make your squad even stronger - to survive the occasional bad rolls.
But even then, bad rolls turn up way too often (subjectively) - as proven by a recent cup tie.

There's no need to be afraid.
The STE and MOT T11 are almost as strong.

And the SESL group matches are certainly the easiest way to claim victory over Dundee anyway.

Generally speaking, does this team sponsorship be achievable most seasons?

Generally speaking, certainly. It is clearly one of the easiest and safest sponsors.
However, it might not have been the best choice for AI.

Overall winning bids >  D1 teams = 23, D2 teams = 6, D3 teams = 7.

Those numbers are skewed simply because some offers are mainly interesting to Div1 teams, specifically

• CPs/TPs - since only with an already strong team you need coaching to keep it strong - and many Div1 teams are already at max CP
• young players (age 0/1) - given that lower divs get them for free or much cheaper

So the only competed ressource are impact players.
And given their low number and the usually higher starting accounts of Div1 teams, I fail to see an issue.