We can absolutely agree to disagree it was dumb
Why do you think it’s dumb? It’s just probability.
Inputs/Assumptions:
1) OT is 50/50
2) McPherson makes Extra Points @ 97% clip
3) Bengals stop Ravens from FG @ end of regulation 75% of the time (This number doesn’t really matter - it’ll give a different end % but the difference between the two options will remain the same)
Variable:
1) Bengals chance of converting 2 Pt Conversion (Will be designated by ‘X’)
Odds to win kicking PAT:
= (McPherson Making PAT) * (Stop Ravens in Regulation) * (Win OT)
= (.97)(.75)(.5) = 36.375% Chance to win
Odds to win going for 2:
= (Making 2 Pt Conversion) * (Stop Ravens in Regulation)
= (X)(.75) = .75X
When is it worth it?:
You’d want to go for two if it helps your win probability. So at worst you’d want a chance to win (at minimum) of 37%
.75X = .37
X needs to equal at least .4933 (or) 49.33%
Conclusion:
If Bengals think they can score on the two point try at least 49.33% of the time, it is the correct choice to go for it.
Edit:
You can also play around with the inputs as you like (for example: you don't think OT is 50/50, you have a better chance of stopping them from getting a FG if you're winning vs losing etc.) but it will always pop out a number of the % of times Bengals would need to score a 2 pt conversion.
You could argue the Bengals are 'dumb' in their assumption of their 2 pt conversion rate (like if they think they will convert 70% of the time) - but as long as their internally used 2 pt conversion success rate provides a higher expected winning %, then their decision making is sound.