Moonhart44

I agree with what was said here, but if you intend to draw figures, you need to take figure drawing courses. The weaknesses in anatomy are the easiest thing to spot and also the most glaring when people critically view figures. Without a strong basis in figural drawing, any figures you compose will be weaker than they could be. I have yet to meet an artist who did not improve having taken advanced figure drawing classes, or one who regret taking them. 
 
There are good ideas here, but they won't reach their fullest level without composition, anatomy, etc. You can't break the rules before you've mastered them. Just look up Picasso's classic academy-style sketch works. This:
 

 
came long before this:
 

 
I think your art clearly displays a desire to work with figures, and thus advise you take more classes to perfect your formal abilities. 

About the 20 pieces...
 
I was straight up told by the head of graduate admissions at an art school that they give you "20 slots" but have no desire to see anything that's not your best work. They're happy with 10 or even less if that's what it takes, because they grade everything as a whole and any weak piece will bring down your score.
 
And yes, they've no desire to see "experimenting with this.." or "trying out that.." - just what you're good at and want to continue doing. Don't try to show them range, they'll have none of it - unless you're universally good at everything.

The main reason most people wait to apply is because you need to have 20 pieces of strong, cohesive work with which to apply. If you are 21, all you have to apply with are your school assignments, which of course will not be cohesive, because each assignment was different, and probably not strong, because it would have been your first time using that medium probably.
 
Most artwork takes a long time to do. This puts most applicants in their late twenties when they apply. There are threads on here listing average ages, and most of them are around 28. This is of course including the odd very young student and the odd mid life one. If you throw out the outliers, I'd bet the mean is closer to 30 or 31.
 
Don't worry- I really sweated the age thing too, and I realize now that it was stupid. I might be over 30 even when I start because I've realized I'd rather travel than be in school again, and honestly I'm not really worried about it.
 
I think in a way you might actually suffer from starting too soon. I had a friend that went straight through to graduate school because she had a full scholarship, which is great. But when I see her work now versus what she did in undergrad, I don't see much of a difference. Plus it put her at a disadvantage, being so young, for jobs, whether that is legal or not. Most people want mature artists teaching their adjunct classes. Now I'm not talking TOO old- but an applicant with an MFA from say Indiana Bloomington that is 31 will probably be hired over a 25 year old. They are afraid students will not respect a very young instructor (and 25 is one year removed from the 16-24 age bracket denominating "youth"). So at 25 you are one year away from being lumped in statistically with a group that includes teenagers.  I'm not saying this is right or fair but I have contacts on boards at universities, and this is a legitimate thing.
 
Another factor to consider is the economy. It's not getting any better, but if it were, dragging it out as long as possible buys you time to hope that the market you enter isn't like it is now.

I find it hard to make comments about your work because it lacks cohesion. A re-organization of the individual pieces may help, but it also may be that you need to work through your ideas more. The first two sentences of your statement are good, but you loose me when you start telling me what to think. I also don't think that in general your figures are particulary distorted, so that throws me off as well.