I don't think sympathy is reason enough to keep someone as coordinator who otherwise isn't qualified for the job. He's making as much at Alabama as he made in his previous 3 seasons (including as OC) combined, that's enough money for me to not worry too much about him having a hard time.
Someone defended his performance at Indiana by basically saying he got bad Penix. Why did he get bad Penix though? If I do some rough math and average his ratings with Sheridan vs. the season prior (with DeBoer was OC) I get this: 157.6 at Indiana under Deboer to 119.2 under Sheridan. That is an apples to apples comparison since it's the same QB at the same school. Although, interestingly enough he went right back to 151 rating when Grubb was his OC at Washington. Even more interesting, his last season under Sheridan he had 4 TDs and 7 INTs and then somehow that turns into 31 TDs and 8 INTs under Grubb.
Penix went into a tailspin under Sheridan and then pulled out of it under Grubb. It's a bit coincidental. The same thing happened this year actually. Milroe under Rees was obviously flawed and limited, but he still had a 172 rating under Rees that dropped to a 148 rating under Sheridan. A 23/6 TD/INT ratio dropped to 16/11. A bit odd ain't it? It's a bit more than that though, Milroe got worse progressively under Sheridan, which is also what happened to Penix under Sheridan. His rating dropped each month, all the way down to 104 in December. Penix dropped to 101.9 rating his final season under Sheridan.
So, we can all agree Milroe was an issue, but how did Sheridan manage to get both the worst version of Penix and the worst version of Milroe? Seems pretty darn unlucky... and I can't point to any QB he helped improve because that's basically his entire resume.