None of the items you list were inevitable - they were due to the screw ups of the management team appointed - and IIRC you have commented on such repeatedly yourself - and that is one of the cardinal points considered during selection - the quality of the team.
Ummm, no it's not. What is considered during selection is the quality of the proposal. Boeing had a quality proposal, Airbus less so, and thus Boeing (eventually) won. Often (usually) many (most?) of the details of the development team are not known during the proposal stage so they cannot be evaluated by the proposal evaluation team. Even if the details of the development team were known, the government has no evaluation criteria for judging the quality of the overall team or of the individuals within that team. Second, a contractor can move people around within its organization with no government oversight. Perhaps anther program has a higher internal priority and a critical team member needs to be moved to that program. The government cannot stop that. So the team in the proposal may or may not be the team that actually does the job. And third, people are free to move from company to company. Once a company wins a proposal, they can poach top managers and engineers away from another company. And other companies can do the same to them. So even if it were possible to evaluate the quality of a team, there is no way to guarantee that team will remain intact for the life of the program/contract. So no, the development team is NOT "one of the cardinal points considered during selection."