My home water was south Florida for 20 years. I fished quite a bit with little more than flippin' gear in the boat. Thick vegetation was a mainstay. I never really had leverage issues with a largemouth bass due to the fish's strength, regardless of rod length. A 20 pound Dorado, sure...a bass, ummm, no.
We used the longest flippin' rods available. Why? For as much vertical lift (of the fish) as we could get. The best chance of landing a fish was to bring it UP and out the hole the lure went into. A shorter rod meant you had more angle to the side of the hole. The more you pulled a fish to the side (rather than up) the bigger and bigger the ball of vegetation holding the fish got. It was the bulldozed wad of vegetation that caused the problem, not the fish's strength.
For any given distance to where a lure lands, a longer rod provides a better angle of pull to the fish than a shorter rod. The only time I favor a shorter rod is in tight quarters for maneuverability. That wasn't an issue in South Florida with no overhanging tree cover.
Flippin-Out is correct about the angle. My assumptions for the two graphics below are that after the flip or pitch that the butt of the rod is up at 5 feet, then extends another 6' or 7' depending on which length one chooses. So, note the 11' and 12' lengths below, adding 5 feet to each. And, I also assumed a 20 ft. distance between the angler's feet and the hole it punches through, no adjustment made for the height off the water.
It amounts to about a 4 degrees shift, that is, a 7 foot rod's line would be 4 degrees more vertical than a 6 footer. So, it is correct that a longer rod will "lift" the fish more vertically, better chance of cranking it out of the same hole the lure fell through. Better be fast, though!
Situations differ, no one length is optimal. Here, you choose between leverage and accuracy . . . over the 4 degrees or so lifting angle and quicker take-up of the line at and after the hook set.
Good stuff. Nerdy, but "putting a number" to it.
See my calcs below.
Brad