The funny thing about analysts that are picking the Hawks to regress or fail is that they cannot find anything legitimate to base their prediction on.
They are relegated to using things like hunger level, SB hangover, history of other teams, draft picks of other teams and of course the curse.
They might mention the losses of Clemons, Bryant, Tate, Thurmond and Browner, but with this team, outside of Tate's PR performance there isn't any one factor that would have any real impact. The Hawks have played without Browner and Thurmond both for long periods of time, even Clemons. They lose Bryant but get a very effective Kevin Williams in his place. They assume that guys like Harvin are going to miss most of the season. They forget that Harvin is actually an acquisition for this season.
What good team didn't lose good players? Why is it only the Hawks that take a step back?
If a team can get to the Super Bowl without Harvin and possesses the depth of the Hawks, how can they genuinely look at a camera and claim that another team will beat them out? It is all speculation and assumption, nothing more. Are the Hawks going to repeat? Who knows? But I am certainly confident that they will be in the conversation come December.