I still argue that they're only superficially the same. The appeal of watching partly choreographed fights with pre determined winners is completely different to the appeal of watching an actual live sport where anything could happen.
Wrestling tells stories. In sport, sometimes stories happen, but it's never anything other than a happy accident.
Wrestling has more in common with Rocky movies, than Rocky movies have in common with boxing, in terms of their impact on the audience, and why the audience enjoy them. Boxing has zero appeal to me, but I love Rocky.
I think that's because most sports are handicapped by being real. They don't have the advantages WWE has in being able to build a story with a beginning, middle, and end, in which things happen to propel the plot. That said, I think narratives do tend to naturally emerge in real sports.
The grand narrative of the 2014 Stanley Cup playoffs was the Kings coming back from 0-3 in the first round, squeaking by the second, then going to a ton of game 7s en route to winning the cup. It was a story of resilience and toughness. The story of the 2014 NBA Playoffs was redemption; the Spurs had a chance to redeem themselves in the same situation, against the same team, but with an extra year of wear on their tired bodies.
The best Ultimate fights are built on stories too (I'd give you examples but I legit cannot think of any because fuck the Ultimate), just like, say, WrestleMania. I mean, yeah, you get the Just Bleed crowd, but when you look at the PPVs that have popped massive buyrates, the common denominator between them is they all had a great buildup, be it in the form of an "angle" for the fight, or a character who has been developed over time.