Perhaps...the footprints don't seem to have compressed the overlaying (rotting) leaves and such like, but seem to have simply revealed the underlying mud.
The position of the footprints also seem to me, at least, to be very strange. They seem to inverting towards each other, which if the creature was standing would probably be not too mkuch of a problem. But if it was walking then (and I am assuming it is a biped, which it could very much not be) then the postion of the feet would make it slightly more harder to do.
If I'm wrong on any of these points please correct me.
Personally, I am more interested on the verbal descriptions given in the article...and especially love the reference to it being a possible dinosaur.