So you are just shy of a 17-foot length.
What is the longest cue length you would be using?
If you don't want to use a shorty-cue, and assuming you are using the most common 58-inch pool cue, forget about an oversized 8-foot or a 9-foot pool table in a room that size.
You could get away with an oversized-8 foot pool table in your game room, but your cue would need to be 57" in length or shorter.
If you are using a 58-inch cue, you would need to go with a standard 8-foot pool table if you don't want to use shorter cues in certain situations.
Regarding your question about how often you could expect your shot to be obstructed if you went with a larger 9' or pro 8' pool table, see this discussion on percentage of shots affected by a room that is too small or a cue that is too long for the room. One of our members actually modeled out all of the scenarios and angles and presented the resulting data. Look at the 2nd reply. Here are some key points:
I actually wanted rough approximations as to the number of shots that would actually be unplayable so I came up with an excel spreadsheet that calculates the number of unplayable shots for each option.
First thing that pops out of this analysis is that for most of the shots (with a 58 inch cue), the cue butt position is much closer to the table than the full 58 inch extension. In fact 90 per cent of shots with a 58 inch cue are taken with the cue butt extension and shot allowance being 48 inches from the playing surface edge.
I've been trying to reach him to get his data model template, but I can't find a current email address.
Here is the chart from a Global Billiard Manufacturing which says you could get away with a oversized-8-foot pool table and still use a 57-inch cue. Your maximums are outlined in green.
Olhausen's current chart has a 58" cue option, and puts you at just slightly short for a standard 8-foot pool table.
Either way please let us know what option you go with, and how it ends up playing e.g. how many shots are problematic at that room size.