SJHovey - You make some decent points. I'll admit that I probably let my pride get in the way and put more emphasis on it than is probably warranted. Though sometimes I read comments that gives me the impression the person thinks that it was an irrelevant piece of history and it saddens me.
One thing I will disagree with you on is the difficulty of winning with 18-19 year old in-state recruits (especially back when MNHS hockey wasn't the power house it has become) beating teams that were recruiting 20-something year old freshmen from Canada.
Again, not faulting other programs for doing it as it certainly wasn't against the rules and was actually the norm in college hockey. But, it was an accomplishment for those Brook's teams to not only win those titles, but to do it the way he did.
As for why Minnesota doesn't recruit exclusively in-state anymore? I think that is two-fold. First, there isn't the need to grow the sport locally as much now as there was in the past. MNHS hockey fuels itself now. And second, the Gophers are one of five in-state D1 schools now, and don't always get all the best in-state talent. And with more high quality players emerging from non-standard hockey markets, they can't afford to only recruit in-state unless they get all of the top recruits from the state.