Diocletian is gone and his reforms are still around; the huns did not magic into being the crisis that broke the empire apart, it merely hastened it. "No Hun" is most certainy not going to give a rome-wank especially if it means the main source of roman mercenary manpower starts telling Rome to shove it because they're building their own countries, and the rise of christianity, if it goes on, will starve the empire for manpower.
But the Roman Empire was nowhere close to the point of collapse in the 350s before the Huns came on the scene but after the Diocletian/Constantine reforms had been bedded in: on the contrary, it was experiencing a period of prosperity and agricultural output that was not matched at any time in its history. Without the Huns arriving on the scene, there will be nothing to start the domino process that led to the less prosperous part of the Empire slowing disintegrating.
How does Christianity deplete the pools of Roman manpower? It never stopped the Eastern Romans fielding large native armies for centuries after Constantine's conversion, and in any case, the barbarian born soldiers in the Roman army were generally pretty thoroughly Christianised, fighting, as they were, for an Empire that saw itself as God's instrument in the world.
These peoples will have no incentive to start trying to set up their own breakaway regimes if Roman invincibility is not shattered at Adrianople- they'll be forced to work within the constraints of the Roman system, and take what they're given. None of the leaders of the entire first millenium could really concieve of a world without the Roman Empire at its heart: this is why the Franks so eagerly accepted various titles and trinkets from Constantinople, and then worked so hard to resurrect the WRE. In a world where that state never falls, Germanic leaders won't have any desire to create anything to replace it.