I've got to admit, I'm cautiously sympathetic to the idea of something like bigfoot- provided we're talking animals here, and not dealing with the crowd that thinks they're ghosts, aliens, etc. Most of what gets publicized is probably crap, some of it demonstrably crap, but there's just enough to it that I wonder.
If you look at what evidence there is- primarily anecdotal and track-based- most of it ends up being indeterminate, some ends up as obvious misidentification, and some more as (usually pretty poor) hoaxing. There is a tiny bit more, though, that really gets interesting once you sift through the nonsense. Not enough to prove much of anything, to be sure, but enough to merit a closer look and perhaps even attempts to gather more meaningful evidence.
And, inevitably, as soon as I or anyone else says something like that, some dolt living in a trailer comes shambling along in his underwear and claims to have had tea with Sassy twice weekly for twelve years, or a really awful show gets aired- complete with Blair Witch-like camera work and lots of shouting and interpersonal drama in lieu of anything substantive, and it ruins any chance whatsoever of reasoned discussion or work by anyone.
At the very least, though, it's ahead of most other supposed or mythical animals, just because in anecdotal descriptions of its behavior it usually acts like you would generally expect any large animal or even an ape to act, with regards to its terrain, other animals, travel, cover, etc. Most other mythical animals, in contrast, act more like monsters from a cheap 1970's horror film, and maraud after individuals for no apparent reason or reward.