Instinctively, my answer is no. I'd expect the Lyapunov exponents in the system to be zero - the degrees of freedom are rotation (no exp divergence, ignoring friction) & center of mass (ditto), so there's nothing to amplify quantum fluctuations, even in the absence of decoherence
That said, I'm not sure, and would need to reflect further
Fun problem; it'd make a nice essay question for a class on quantum chaos!
Reflecting more: there's something funny about unstable equilibria. Eg if I start a pendulum inverted, quantum fluctuations + decoherence will make the pendulum "choose" a side, pretty rapidly. But AFAICS there are no similar points for the coin...
There's a lot of ways one could engage with this (and reasons one might be wary). Here I will mostly adopt one frame, which is thinking from a personal pov about these principles, applying the principle of charity
Put another way: in this thread I want to engage positively and earnestly with the principles, and with criticism as a means to improvement or alternate perspectives, not as a principal end in itself
Pedantically, we can also try to reason directly about it, we don't need to rely on metaphor. But the point about how slippery metaphor is is a good one
Related: the very tricky relationship between "narratively plausible" and "potentially true"
I've been collecting examples of things which are narratively plausible, but (very likely) false. A good one is faster-than-light travel. Are there any you like?