Injuries during sporting events are considered accepted risks of the activity in viritually every state. I was curious what was going on here so looked up some articles and the appellate opinoin that explains why this case was allowed to proceed at all. While it got some attention, it's an aberrant result that has no meaning or value to anyone other than the participants.
In this New Jersey case, the trial court (properly) dismissed the complaint without discussion because plaintiff did not allege the the coach was reckless. But the dismissal was without analysis (suggesting the court thought the case was borderline frivolous). For some reason, the plaintiff appealed and the appellate case reversed and sent it back down so the trial court could consider whether there was recklessness alleged in the complaint. The trial court should have just entered a more thorough order of dismissal. Instead, he let the case go to trial, where the plaintiff lost (no money awarded). Waste of time for everyone involved and should have never happened.
In other words, the entire proceeding had far more to do with some poor judicial rulings in letting the case go forward than anything else. Coaches are not going to start getting sued for game decisions and injuries.