Symbolically though, Crimea would be a loss I dont think he could come back from.
Of course Putin could not recover from losing Crimea. That would set us back not to February of 2022, but all the way back to 2014. A pretty disastrous result.
But going from "the Kerch Bridge is destroyed" to "Crimea is lost" - is a huge leap.
Britain and France (and the Ottoman Turks) were not able to effectively dislodge Russia from Crimea during the Crimean War. Back then there was no bridge, and the French and British had pretty complete dominance over the seas.
Hitler spent 20X more men and material taking Crimea than he originally expected. This involved using the largest artillery gun in history, and basically burying all the defenders of Sevastopol under collapsing cliffs. Crimea was a sort of Stalingrad, in miniature.
It's not like all the Russians in Crimea will get on boats and start rowing towards Russia as soon as the bridge collapses. No... you still need to invade the peninsula. You still need to supply Ukrainian forces as they campaign there. You need to have adequate reserves to not just conquer the place, but to occupy it too - since the Crimeans are not big fans of Ukraine.
Does Ukraine have the manpower for that?