If the opinion published Friday night in a landmark college sports antitrust case were a novel, then its villain would be the N.C.A.A.

In a novella-length 104-page opinion, United States District Court Judge Claudia Wilken criticizes, berates, even mocks the N.C.A.A. for its refusal to allow colleges to compensate players for their valuable labor beyond a scholarship and related costs of attendance, all in the name of something they call amateurism.

“Defendants nowhere define the nature of the amateurism they claim consumers insist upon,” said Wilken, referring to the N.C.A.A. and several of its richest, most prominent conferences.

Even if they had, Wilken continued, she pointed to numerous exceptions when players could, effectively, be paid. Players are paid, beyond scholarships, all the time: in untold millions of dollars invested in training facilities; in gifts for participating in bowl games; in funds available to purchase loss-of-value insurance.