In American Football bringing an extra defenceman to go after the Quarterback is referred to as the Blitz. Does this terminology relate to the German Blitzkrieg (Lightning War) in WW2 or does it pre-date WW2?

It comes from World War II, but it didn't have the connotation it has today. Instead, it was used in the more general sense of a rapid attack against which defense is futile or of little effect.

In this context, it shows up as much in basketball and other sports as much as football. The Dec. 6, 1940 issue of the Chicago Tribune described a University of Georgia victory over the University of Chicago: "The Bulldogs' final blitz attack climaxed a nip and tuck battle after Chicago had taken a 12 to 10 lead at the half."

During the wartime years, I've been unable to find a reference to a defensive blitz. It was always used in regard to offense rather than defense. If you think about it, that makes sense. The blitzkrieg as seen from American eyes was an offensive movement: against Poland, against the Low Countries, against France, against Yugoslavia, against Greece, and in the initial stages against the Soviet Union.

The Aug. 23, 1942 Tribune contains an article about Stanford halfback Pete Kmetovic, claiming in its headline "Kmetovic Proves Theory That Personnel Is Key to Blitz of T". To modern eyes, that's talking about a way to disrupt the T-formation offense. Instead, the article explains how Kmetovic (an all-star that year) was key to Stanford's 1940 running attack (one of the nation's best).

The Oct. 11, 1942 New York Times, in its description of a Columbia-Brown football game describes how Brown's two touchdowns in 11 plays "turned out to be an air raid shelter against a Columbia 'Blitz' in the final stanza." The Oct. 3, 1943 issue of the Times describes how Colgate was mystified by the speed of the Army offense in a 42-0 loss: "Colgate, a power in football for many years, was utterly at the mercy of the blitz, baffled by its fakery and rooted to the ground by its speed."

Note how the Times both capitalized and put into quotes the term in 1942, an indication of its unfamiliarity, but those had disappeared a year later. In the Dec. 4, 1942 issue of the Times, an Associated Press story described how the war had opened up football to a fast-paced style of play with more scoring and bigger plays. Michigan State coach Charley Backman was quoted: "World War II has had a definite influence on football, with many teams patterning play after blitz techniques of military leaders."

This, I think, is the most definitive answer as to where the term comes from.

Note that it was also used in this context with regard to professional football as well as collegiate. The Nov. 12, 1945 issue of the Times contains an Associated Press report about a Green Bay Packers-Cleveland Rams game that ended in a 20-7 Rams victory and a bleacher collapse that injured dozens: "Cleveland's Rams unleashed a furious first-quarter blitz, then settled down to play brilliant defensive ball and topple the Green Bay Packers, 20 to 7, in a National Football League game today."

But what about its modern context, a defensive blitz?

The invention of the defensive blitz is credited to a coach named Heartly William "Hunk" Anderson. (Here's a quick recollection of his career by his son, published in the Times 10 years ago.)

Anderson was born in 1898 and got his head coaching start in 1928 with the Saint Louis Billikens (this being my connection to the story, as the Billiken was an early 20th century fad object thought to come from Alaska ─ not true). Anderson was a line coach at heart, and he was fond of experimentation. In 1931, he was named the head coach of the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, America's most famous football team at the time, after famed coach Knute Rockne died in a plane crash.

Anderson had played for Rockne between 1918 and 1921, and he brought his experimental ways with him to Notre Dame. He formulated an approach he called "red dog," red meaning to be alert and dog meaning to hound the quarterback. In Notre Dame's Nov. 21, 1931 game against Southern California, he employed this technique for the first time, sending Steve Banas to "red dog" every time USC's Ernie Pinckert played at tailback. The approach didn't contribute to a win: Notre Dame lost, 16-14.

After a moderate level of success at Notre Dame, Anderson was let go from that team and moved to North Carolina, where he coached North Carolina State. The "red dog" approach remained uncommon. It was not a regular aspect of his defensive scheme. After three mediocre years at NC State (where he compiled an overall 11-17-1 record), he left the team.

In 1939, Anderson was hired as a line coach for the Detroit Lions by head coach Gus Henderson. Henderson later called Anderson "the Master of Defense" for the strategies he conducted. When the Lions faced the Chicago Bears that year, Anderson brought the "red dog" to professional football. Fred Vanzo became the first to use the technique, and the Lions routed the Bears 10-0, holding the Bears' offense to just 56 yards.

The Bears would ultimately finish ahead of the Lions in the NFL's Western Division, but Bears head coach George Halas was so impressed by the Lions' defense that he hired Anderson to coach the Bears' offensive and defensive lines. The Bears would go 8-3 in 1940, but they advanced to the NFL championship game where they crushed Washington 73-0.

Jim Dent's Monster of the Midway about the WWII-era Chicago Bears and Emil Klosinski's biography of Anderson are good sources if you're interested in reading about Anderson's career.

The red dog defense's aggressiveness eventually combined with the offensive aggressiveness of the blitz (in the 1950s, you'll sometimes see references to "defensive blitz"), and by the time the Baltimore Colts used it effectively in their 1960s championship runs, the defensive sense of the term had clearly come out on top.