My guess is his lawyer could find numerous cases where other employees with similar clauses dated a student with no repercussions. Which is why I don’t think those clauses mean a whole lot in the end - and if that’s all the university is going on this will not end well for them.
And I’m honestly not sure why you think a coach hooking up with a student is such a travesty. I’ve spent my career working in large industrial facilities employee thousands of people - often in towns of roughly 40,000 people. And we always had “office romances” where someone in accounting was dating someone in engineering, where they had no workplace contact. It was really easy to meet at a gym, go out to dinner, and discover you happened to both work at the largest employer (by far) in town. Didn’t stop people from proceeding (nor should it have).
So you’d need to spell out exactly why a coach chatting up a girl at the gym, going to dinner and continuing his pursuit when he finds out she’s a student he’d never have any workplace contact with is such a huge issue. It can’t be “power dynamic” because as noted he has no specific power in that situation. If it’s just general power, you might want to think through the consequences of that - can a single Senator date a female resident if his state, because he has greater general power than a head coach?
Unless there’s more details to this case that you’re aware of, this feels like you have some weird personal hang-up that you want to see vigorously enforced on the world.