Go and have a look at the other thread and see what SL clubs provide for their players. Then come back and tell me that 17 players training full time would mean they can compete with fully professional clubs.
That thread discusses the wage bills for staff at top SL clubs. Do you think that they pay the same at the bottom? If they do, they're not paying the right people!
It works both ways. Just because someone is getting paid more doesn't mean they do their job better. But if an athlete is full time rather than part time, they have more training hours to become better athletes. That can make a huge difference. If you think going from part time to full time wouldn't make athletes more competitive, why do we have full time sportsmen?
As for then being "able to compete with fully professional clubs", we're not asking them to play St Helens. We're asking then to play the likes of Cas, London, Widnes, Wakefield, Bradford, etc. Clubs that are struggling on the field. Recent results show they are already competing (not necessarily winning all the time, but getting within very close scores most of it). So yeah, I think having more full time players WOULD help them compete FURTHER with these clubs at the bottom end of SL (since they're already doing OK against them in head to head matches).
It might be "their Wembley" when they meet in the cup, but they're only playing them (SL clubs) four times here. It's possible for a few upsets whether you like to admit that or not.