UK has not, and does not expect Stoops to be competitive in the conference as a whole. You can't really compare Heupel to Stoops, unless we lower the expectations for Heupel, or Kentucky raises the expectations for Stoops.
Kentucky is perfectly fine with the job Stoops is doing. Would you be fine with keeping Heupel for 8+ seasons if during that time he only had one winning SEC record, and never had a win over Florida/Georgia/Alabama?
You're taking it to literal. It was just an example that Stoops (for UK's expectations of performance and success) showed signs beyond his W/L (12-24 his first 3 years) that he had the program moving in the right direction. They stuck with him and it has paid off. I'm not saying they're contenders or anything but they're not the same ole 2-10 UK everyone puts a beat down on annually either, they are a respectable football team.
If Huepel, in his first 3-4 seasons, isn't winning championships or going 11-1 like we all want but is showing progress outside of the W/L column that indicates he has it going in the right direction (good recruiting, building depth with redshirts, beating the teams we should beat, closing the gap with our biggest rivals, etc)then you give him some more time to continue building. Yes, he has to earn that right through performance and I don't know exactly what that looks like but if he has the potential to breakthrough you give him more time vs tearing it down again.