“If cryptozoology gave more time to genuine folklore and myth studies in the Campbell vein, the field would get more credence in the academic world.”

There are two dubious assumptions here. First, that gaining credence in the academic world is necessarily a good thing. Second, that “myth studies in the Campbell vein” would impress academics. Campbell’s notoriously sloppy and tendentious “studies” certainly do not impress any academics that I know. Campbell is no Mircea Eliade, to put it mildly (and even Eliade’s work has significant problems, though far, far fewer than Campbell’s silly popularization).