You're kind of right but missing some pretty big context.
Osborne did mostly stand still for his first 7-8 years, but he stood still at being a top ten program, major bowls, and conference championships. His big hump of staying still was beating Oklahoma, which he finally did in year 6. After that, he started turning 9-10 win seasons into 11-12 win seasons for a while, then regressed back a bit (still to being a top ten team winning championships), then he finished with the best run in history.
So if you're trying to make a point in regards to equating the two, it's a stupid point.
I think you meant to respond to me. The point is he didn't win any, and after year seven we were as close or further away from that goal than we were in year one.