Thematically there's a niche for Sorcerers. They form a trinity with Wizard and Warlock of learned power, borrowed power, and inborn power. The big question is if there's a mechanical niche for Sorcerer that's both distinct from the other two and still robust enough to support an entire class. Evidence for that is scarcer and more conjectural.
I have no objection to the Sorcerer existing. In fact, I rather like the concept of its flavor. But there's very little history of D&D being able to deliver a Sorcerer that's not living in the shadow of the Wizard, and it doesn't have a strong enough legacy to justify keeping it around for that alone. So maybe you kill some sacred cows and reinvent the Sorcerer. Maybe you merge it with the Warlock and include a toggle option between inborn and patron power sources. Or maybe you just cut it. I don't exactly have a horse in that race, besides the mild annoyance of occasionally trying to play a Sorcerer and being disappointed.
I think there has too be some community issue with Sorcerer. It can't be second class to Wizard by accident. I think at some level, people aren't trying. It's not like the druid where turn undead could have been swapped for wild shape and have druids just be nature/animal/plant/fungi clerics. There is something in us that keeps making up halfway do the concept then get mad that we can't replicate the innate spellcasters of modern fantasy. D&D had the chance to push a fully fleshedout sorcerer, a sorcerer subclass, or a core sorcerer DM option so we wouldn't have this issue.
Personally I would do a learned, innate, and divine version of magical, martial and skill classes. Then have the granted magical class and halfcaster class for the remainder. That's all you can do at this point. You can't roll it back to 3-5 classes anymore.